On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 4:54 PM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Sep 2024 11:41:17 -0700 > Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > + BPF ML > > > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 8:35 AM <bot+bpf-ci@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Dear patch submitter, > > > > > > CI has tested the following submission: > > > Status: FAILURE > > > Name: [v14,00/19] tracing: fprobe: function_graph: Multi-function graph and fprobe on fgraph > > > Patchwork: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=889822&state=* > > > Matrix: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/10833792984 > > > > > > Failed jobs: > > > test_progs-aarch64-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/10833792984/job/30061791397 > > > test_progs_no_alu32-aarch64-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/10833792984/job/30061791836 > > > test_progs-s390x-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/10833792984/job/30061757062 > > > test_progs_no_alu32-s390x-gcc: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/10833792984/job/30061757809 > > > > > > First test_progs failure (test_progs-aarch64-gcc): > > > #132 kprobe_multi_testmod_test > > > serial_test_kprobe_multi_testmod_test:PASS:load_kallsyms_local 0 nsec > > > #132/1 kprobe_multi_testmod_test/testmod_attach_api_syms > > > test_testmod_attach_api:PASS:fentry_raw_skel_load 0 nsec > > > trigger_module_test_read:PASS:testmod_file_open 0 nsec > > > test_testmod_attach_api:PASS:trigger_read 0 nsec > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kprobe_test1_result unexpected kprobe_test1_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kprobe_test2_result unexpected kprobe_test2_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kprobe_test3_result unexpected kprobe_test3_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kretprobe_test1_result unexpected kretprobe_test1_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kretprobe_test2_result unexpected kretprobe_test2_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kretprobe_test3_result unexpected kretprobe_test3_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > #132/2 kprobe_multi_testmod_test/testmod_attach_api_addrs > > > test_testmod_attach_api_addrs:PASS:ksym_get_addr_local 0 nsec > > > test_testmod_attach_api_addrs:PASS:ksym_get_addr_local 0 nsec > > > test_testmod_attach_api_addrs:PASS:ksym_get_addr_local 0 nsec > > > test_testmod_attach_api:PASS:fentry_raw_skel_load 0 nsec > > > trigger_module_test_read:PASS:testmod_file_open 0 nsec > > > test_testmod_attach_api:PASS:trigger_read 0 nsec > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kprobe_test1_result unexpected kprobe_test1_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kprobe_test2_result unexpected kprobe_test2_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kprobe_test3_result unexpected kprobe_test3_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kretprobe_test1_result unexpected kretprobe_test1_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kretprobe_test2_result unexpected kretprobe_test2_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kretprobe_test3_result unexpected kretprobe_test3_result: actual 0 != expected 1 > > > > > > > Seems like this selftest is still broken. Please let me know if you > > need help with building and running BPF selftests to reproduce this > > locally. > > Thanks, It will be helpful. Also I would like to know, is there any > debug mode (like print more debug logs)? So first of all, the assumption is that you will build a most recent kernel with Kconfig values set from tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config, so make sure you append that to your kernel config. Then build the kernel, BPF selftests' Makefile tries to find latest built kernel (according to KBUILD_OUTPUT/O/etc). Now to building BPF selftests: $ cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf $ make -j$(nproc) You'll need decently recent Clang and a few dependent packages. At least elfutils-devel, libzstd-devel, but there might be a few more which I never can remember. Once everything is built, you can run the failing test with $ sudo ./test_progs -t kprobe_multi_testmod_test -v The source code for user space part for that test is in prog_tests/kprobe_multi_testmod_test.c and BPF-side is in progs/kprobe_multi.c. Taking failing output from the test: > > > kprobe_multi_testmod_check:FAIL:kretprobe_test3_result unexpected kretprobe_test3_result: actual 0 != expected 1 kretprobe_test3_result is a sort of identifier for a test condition, you can find a corresponding line in user space .c file grepping for that: ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->kretprobe_testmod_test3_result, 1, "kretprobe_test3_result"); Most probably the problem is in: __u64 addr = bpf_get_func_ip(ctx); which is then checked as if ((const void *) addr == &bpf_testmod_fentry_test3) With your patches this doesn't match anymore. Hopefully the above gives you some pointers, let me know if you run into any problems. > > Thank you, > > > > > > > > > Please note: this email is coming from an unmonitored mailbox. If you have > > > questions or feedback, please reach out to the Meta Kernel CI team at > > > kernel-ci@xxxxxxxx. > > > -- > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>
