On 2024/7/11 10:01, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-06-24 at 00:15 +0800, Leon Hwang wrote:
>> Add some test cases to confirm the tailcall hierarchy issue has been fixed.
>>
>> On x64, the selftests result is:
>>
>> cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf && ./test_progs -t tailcalls
>> 327/18 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_1:OK
>> 327/19 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry:OK
>> 327/20 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fexit:OK
>> 327/21 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry_fexit:OK
>> 327/22 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry_entry:OK
>> 327/23 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_2:OK
>> 327/24 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_3:OK
>> 327 tailcalls:OK
>> Summary: 1/24 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>>
>> On arm64, the selftests result is:
>>
>> cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf && ./test_progs -t tailcalls
>> 327/18 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_1:OK
>> 327/19 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry:OK
>> 327/20 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fexit:OK
>> 327/21 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry_fexit:OK
>> 327/22 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry_entry:OK
>> 327/23 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_2:OK
>> 327/24 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_3:OK
>> 327 tailcalls:OK
>> Summary: 1/24 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>
> Nitpick:
> I think that test cases *_hierarchy_{2,3} could be rewritten as
> example by this link:
> https://gist.github.com/eddyz87/af9b50d0ff3802b43f0e148591790017
> It uses test_loader.c machinery, you can use RUN_TESTS macro from any
> prog_tests/*.c file to run test cases from a specific binary file.
It seems great to me. Thank you for your example.
Thanks,
Leon
>
> Otherwise these test cases look good to me.
>
> Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> [...]
