On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 8:13 AM Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> add tests that verify attaching by name for
>
> 1. local functions in a program
> 2. library functions in a shared object; and
> 3. library functions in a program
>
> ...succeed for uprobe and uretprobes using new "func_name"
> option for bpf_program__attach_uprobe_opts(). Also verify
> auto-attach works where uprobe, path to binary and function
> name are specified, but fails with -ESRCH when the format
> does not match (the latter is to support backwards-compatibility).
>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 89 +++++++++++++++++++++-
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_attach_probe.c | 37 +++++++++
> 2 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
[...]
> if (CHECK(skel->bss->uprobe_res != 3, "check_uprobe_res",
> "wrong uprobe res: %d\n", skel->bss->uprobe_res))
> goto cleanup;
> @@ -110,7 +179,21 @@ void test_attach_probe(void)
> "wrong uretprobe res: %d\n", skel->bss->uretprobe_res))
> goto cleanup;
>
> + if (CHECK(skel->bss->uprobe_byname_res != 5, "check_uprobe_byname_res",
> + "wrong uprobe byname res: %d\n", skel->bss->uprobe_byname_res))
> + goto cleanup;
> + if (CHECK(skel->bss->uretprobe_byname_res != 6, "check_uretprobe_byname_res",
> + "wrong uretprobe byname res: %d\n", skel->bss->uretprobe_byname_res))
> + goto cleanup;
> + if (CHECK(skel->bss->uprobe_byname2_res != 7, "check_uprobe_byname2_res",
> + "wrong uprobe byname2 res: %d\n", skel->bss->uprobe_byname2_res))
> + goto cleanup;
> + if (CHECK(skel->bss->uretprobe_byname2_res != 8, "check_uretprobe_byname2_res",
> + "wrong uretprobe byname2 res: %d\n", skel->bss->uretprobe_byname2_res))
> + goto cleanup;
> +
Please don't use CHECK()s for new code, only ASSERT_xxx() for new code.
> cleanup:
> + free(libc_path);
> test_attach_probe__destroy(skel);
> ASSERT_EQ(uprobe_ref_ctr, 0, "uprobe_ref_ctr_cleanup");
> }
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_attach_probe.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_attach_probe.c
> index 8056a4c..9942461c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_attach_probe.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_attach_probe.c
> @@ -10,6 +10,10 @@
> int kretprobe_res = 0;
> int uprobe_res = 0;
> int uretprobe_res = 0;
> +int uprobe_byname_res = 0;
> +int uretprobe_byname_res = 0;
> +int uprobe_byname2_res = 0;
> +int uretprobe_byname2_res = 0;
>
> SEC("kprobe/sys_nanosleep")
> int handle_kprobe(struct pt_regs *ctx)
> @@ -39,4 +43,37 @@ int handle_uretprobe(struct pt_regs *ctx)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +SEC("uprobe/trigger_func_byname")
> +int handle_uprobe_byname(struct pt_regs *ctx)
> +{
> + uprobe_byname_res = 5;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/* use auto-attach format for section definition. */
> +SEC("uretprobe//proc/self/exe:trigger_func2")
> +int handle_uretprobe_byname(struct pt_regs *ctx)
> +{
> + uretprobe_byname_res = 6;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("uprobe/trigger_func_byname2")
> +int handle_uprobe_byname2(struct pt_regs *ctx)
this one is for malloc, so why SEC() doesn't reflect this?
It would be great to also have (probably separate) selftest for
auto-attach logic of skeleton for uprobes.
I'd add a separate uprobe-specific selftests, there is plenty to test
without having kprobes intermingled.
> +{
> + unsigned int size = PT_REGS_PARM1(ctx);
> +
> + /* verify malloc size */
> + if (size == 1)
> + uprobe_byname2_res = 7;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("uretprobe/trigger_func_byname2")
> +int handle_uretprobe_byname2(struct pt_regs *ctx)
> +{
> + uretprobe_byname2_res = 8;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
