On 3/4/22 11:16 AM, Hao Luo wrote:
Add test for percpu btf_type_tag. Similar to the "user" tag, we test the following cases: 1. __percpu struct field. 2. __percpu as function parameter. 3. per_cpu_ptr() accepts dynamically allocated __percpu memory. Because the test for "user" and the test for "percpu" are very similar, a little bit of refactoring has been done in btf_tag.c. Basically, both tests share the same function for loading vmlinux and module btf. Example output from log: > ./test_progs -v -t btf_tag libbpf: prog 'test_percpu1': BPF program load failed: Permission denied libbpf: prog 'test_percpu1': -- BEGIN PROG LOAD LOG -- ... ; g = arg->a; 1: (61) r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 +0) R1 is ptr_bpf_testmod_btf_type_tag_1 access percpu memory: off=0 ... test_btf_type_tag_mod_percpu:PASS:btf_type_tag_percpu 0 nsec #26/6 btf_tag/btf_type_tag_percpu_mod1:OK libbpf: prog 'test_percpu2': BPF program load failed: Permission denied libbpf: prog 'test_percpu2': -- BEGIN PROG LOAD LOG -- ... ; g = arg->p->a; 2: (61) r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 +0) R1 is ptr_bpf_testmod_btf_type_tag_1 access percpu memory: off=0 ... test_btf_type_tag_mod_percpu:PASS:btf_type_tag_percpu 0 nsec #26/7 btf_tag/btf_type_tag_percpu_mod2:OK libbpf: prog 'test_percpu_load': BPF program load failed: Permission denied libbpf: prog 'test_percpu_load': -- BEGIN PROG LOAD LOG -- ... ; g = (__u64)cgrp->rstat_cpu->updated_children; 2: (79) r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 +48) R1 is ptr_cgroup_rstat_cpu access percpu memory: off=48 ... test_btf_type_tag_vmlinux_percpu:PASS:btf_type_tag_percpu_load 0 nsec #26/8 btf_tag/btf_type_tag_percpu_vmlinux_load:OK load_btfs:PASS:could not load vmlinux BTF 0 nsec test_btf_type_tag_vmlinux_percpu:PASS:btf_type_tag_percpu 0 nsec test_btf_type_tag_vmlinux_percpu:PASS:btf_type_tag_percpu_helper 0 nsec #26/9 btf_tag/btf_type_tag_percpu_vmlinux_helper:OK Signed-off-by: Hao Luo <haoluo@xxxxxxxxxx>
With one nit below. Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx>
--- .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 17 ++ .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_tag.c | 164 ++++++++++++++---- .../selftests/bpf/progs/btf_type_tag_percpu.c | 66 +++++++ 3 files changed, 218 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/btf_type_tag_percpu.c diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c index 27d63be47b95..17c211f3b924 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c @@ -33,6 +33,10 @@ struct bpf_testmod_btf_type_tag_2 { struct bpf_testmod_btf_type_tag_1 __user *p; };+struct bpf_testmod_btf_type_tag_3 {+ struct bpf_testmod_btf_type_tag_1 __percpu *p; +}; + noinline int bpf_testmod_test_btf_type_tag_user_1(struct bpf_testmod_btf_type_tag_1 __user *arg) { BTF_TYPE_EMIT(func_proto_typedef); @@ -46,6 +50,19 @@ bpf_testmod_test_btf_type_tag_user_2(struct bpf_testmod_btf_type_tag_2 *arg) { return arg->p->a; }+noinline int+bpf_testmod_test_btf_type_tag_percpu_1(struct bpf_testmod_btf_type_tag_1 __percpu *arg) { + BTF_TYPE_EMIT(func_proto_typedef); + BTF_TYPE_EMIT(func_proto_typedef_nested1); + BTF_TYPE_EMIT(func_proto_typedef_nested2);
Are these necessary? They have been defined in bpf_testmod_test_btf_type_tag_user_1().
+ return arg->a; +} +
[...]
