On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 1:12 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> We have currently 2 uprobes and 2 uretprobes and we are about
> to add sessions uprobes in following change, which makes the
> test time unsuitable for CI even with threads.
>
> It's enough for the test to have just 1 uprobe and 1 uretprobe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> .../bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_multi_test.c | 57 ++++++++-----------
> .../bpf/progs/uprobe_multi_consumers.c | 16 +-----
> 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
>
[...]
> /* 'before' is each, we attach uprobe for every set idx */
> - for (idx = 0; idx < 4; idx++) {
> + for (idx = 0; idx < 1; idx++) {
> if (test_bit(idx, before)) {
> if (!ASSERT_OK(uprobe_attach(skel, idx), "uprobe_attach_before"))
> goto cleanup;
> @@ -866,18 +858,18 @@ static int consumer_test(struct uprobe_multi_consumers *skel,
> if (!ASSERT_EQ(err, 0, "uprobe_consumer_test"))
> goto cleanup;
>
> - for (idx = 0; idx < 4; idx++) {
> + for (idx = 0; idx < 1; idx++) {
here and everywhere else, either idx <= 1 or idx < 2, no?
> const char *fmt = "BUG";
> __u64 val = 0;
>
> - if (idx < 2) {
> + if (idx == 0) {
> /*
> * uprobe entry
> * +1 if define in 'before'
> */
> if (test_bit(idx, before))
> val++;
> - fmt = "prog 0/1: uprobe";
> + fmt = "prog 0: uprobe";
> } else {
> /*
> * to trigger uretprobe consumer, the uretprobe needs to be installed,
[...]
