On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 1:31 PM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 1:26 PM Alexei Starovoitov > <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 10:43 AM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > + > > > +static void test_lsm_cgroup_functional(void) > > > > It fails BPF CI on s390: > > > > test_lsm_cgroup_functional:FAIL:attach alloc_prog_fd unexpected error: > > -524 (errno 524) > > test_lsm_cgroup_functional:FAIL:detach_create unexpected > > detach_create: actual -2 < expected 0 > > test_lsm_cgroup_functional:FAIL:detach_alloc unexpected detach_alloc: > > actual -2 < expected 0 > > test_lsm_cgroup_functional:FAIL:detach_clone unexpected detach_clone: > > actual -2 < expected 0 > > > > https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/runs/7100626120?check_suite_focus=true > > > > but I pushed it to bpf-next anyway. > > Thanks a lot for this work and please follow up with a fix. > > Thanks, I'll take a look! Looks like this needs a blacklist entry in https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/travis-ci/vmtest/configs/blacklist/BLACKLIST-latest.s390x Or, I can make tests more flexible by doing the following (copy-pasting into gmail, so tabs are broken): diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/lsm_cgroup.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/lsm_cgroup.c index d40810a742fa..904b02a17598 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/lsm_cgroup.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/lsm_cgroup.c @@ -100,6 +100,10 @@ static void test_lsm_cgroup_functional(void) ASSERT_EQ(query_prog_cnt(cgroup_fd, "bpf_lsm_sk_alloc_security"), 0, "prog count"); ASSERT_EQ(query_prog_cnt(cgroup_fd, NULL), 0, "total prog count"); err = bpf_prog_attach(alloc_prog_fd, cgroup_fd, BPF_LSM_CGROUP, 0); + if (err < 0 && errno == ENOTSUPP) { + test__skip(); + return; + } if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "attach alloc_prog_fd")) goto detach_cgroup; ASSERT_EQ(query_prog_cnt(cgroup_fd, "bpf_lsm_sk_alloc_security"), 1, "prog count"); Any preference?
