On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 11:46 AM Florian Lehner <dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Print a message when the returned error is about a program type being
> not supported or because of permission problems.
> These messages are expected if the program to test was actually
> executed.
>
> Cc: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Florian Lehner <dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> index ceea9409639e..86ef28dd9919 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> @@ -875,19 +875,35 @@ static int do_prog_test_run(int fd_prog, bool unpriv, uint32_t expected_val,
> __u8 tmp[TEST_DATA_LEN << 2];
> __u32 size_tmp = sizeof(tmp);
> uint32_t retval;
> - int err;
> + int err, saved_errno;
>
> if (unpriv)
> set_admin(true);
> err = bpf_prog_test_run(fd_prog, 1, data, size_data,
> tmp, &size_tmp, &retval, NULL);
> + saved_errno = errno;
> +
> if (unpriv)
> set_admin(false);
> - if (err && errno != 524/*ENOTSUPP*/ && errno != EPERM) {
> - printf("Unexpected bpf_prog_test_run error ");
> - return err;
> +
> + if (err) {
> + switch (saved_errno) {
> + case 524/*ENOTSUPP*/:
> + printf("Did not run the program (not supported) ");
> + return 0;
> + case EPERM:
> + if (unpriv) {
> + printf("Did not run the program (no permission) ");
> + return 0;
> + }
I see people specifying /* fallthrough; */ to make explicit that we
expect falling through into default case?
> + default:
> + printf("FAIL: Unexpected bpf_prog_test_run error (%s) ",
> + strerror(saved_errno));
> + return err;
> + }
> }
> - if (!err && retval != expected_val &&
> +
> + if (retval != expected_val &&
> expected_val != POINTER_VALUE) {
> printf("FAIL retval %d != %d ", retval, expected_val);
> return 1;
> --
> 2.28.0
>
