On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 10:47 AM Pedro Tammela <pctammela@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Andrii suggested to remove this abstraction layer and have the percpu > handling more explicit[1]. > > This patch also updates the tests that relied on the macros. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzYmj_ZPDq8Zi4dbntboJKRPU2TVopysBNrdd9foHTfLZw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Pedro Tammela <pctammela@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_util.h | 7 -- > .../bpf/map_tests/htab_map_batch_ops.c | 87 +++++++++---------- > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/map_init.c | 9 +- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_maps.c | 84 +++++++++++------- > 4 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 91 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_util.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_util.h > index a3352a64c067..105db3120ab4 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_util.h > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_util.h > @@ -20,13 +20,6 @@ static inline unsigned int bpf_num_possible_cpus(void) > return possible_cpus; > } > > -#define __bpf_percpu_val_align __attribute__((__aligned__(8))) > - > -#define BPF_DECLARE_PERCPU(type, name) \ > - struct { type v; /* padding */ } __bpf_percpu_val_align \ > - name[bpf_num_possible_cpus()] > -#define bpf_percpu(name, cpu) name[(cpu)].v > - Hmm. I wonder what Daniel has to say about it, since he introduced it in commit f3515b5d0b71 ("bpf: provide a generic macro for percpu values for selftests") to address a class of bugs.
