Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/6] selftests/bpf: Add traffic monitor functions.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 8/6/24 3:07 PM, Kui-Feng Lee wrote:


On 8/1/24 21:35, Kui-Feng Lee wrote:


On 8/1/24 20:43, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
On 7/31/24 12:31 PM, Kui-Feng Lee wrote:
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h b/tools/testing/ selftests/bpf/test_progs.h
index cb9d6d46826b..5d4e61fa26a1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h
@@ -473,4 +473,20 @@ extern void test_loader_fini(struct test_loader *tester);
      test_loader_fini(&tester);                           \
  })
+struct tmonitor_ctx;
+
+#ifdef TRAFFIC_MONITOR
+struct tmonitor_ctx *traffic_monitor_start(const char *netns);
+void traffic_monitor_stop(struct tmonitor_ctx *ctx);
+#else
+static inline struct tmonitor_ctx *traffic_monitor_start(const char *netns)
+{
+    return (struct tmonitor_ctx *)-1;

hmm... from peeking patch 3, only NULL is checked.

When traffic monitor is disable, these two functions are noop.
Returning -1 (not NULL) is convenient for the callers. They don't need
to tell if the error caused by a real error or by the disabled
feature.

I pasted the code from patch 3 here only to ensure I understand the above explanation correctly:

+		netns_obj->tmon = traffic_monitor_start(name);
+		if (!netns_obj->tmon)
		    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

+			goto fail;

Does it mean the traffic_monitor_start() above will never be called if TRAFFIC_MONITOR macro is not defined such that traffic_monitor_start() returning -1 but testing for NULL here does not matter?





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux