On Tue, 6 Sept 2022 at 05:25, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 2 Sept 2022 at 15:29, Benjamin Tissoires > <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Similar to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/dynptr.c: > > we declare an array of tests that we run one by one in a for loop. > > > > Followup patches will add more similar-ish tests, so avoid a lot of copy > > paste by grouping the declaration in an array. > > > > To be able to call bpf_object__find_program_by_name(), we need to use > > plain libbpf calls, and not light skeletons. So also change the Makefile > > to not generate light skeletons. > > > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > I see your point, but this is also a test so that we keep verifying > kfunc call in light skeleton. > Code for relocating both is different in libbpf (we generate BPF ASM > for light skeleton so it is done inside a loader BPF program instead > of userspace). Err, hit send too early. We can probably use a macro to hide how program is called, then do X(prog1) X(prog2) in a series, won't look too bad and avoids duplication at the same time. > You might then be able to make it work for both light and normal skeleton. > WDYT?
