Re: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 6/6] selftests/bpf: check that ->elem_count is non-zero for the hash map

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 9:00 AM Anton Protopopov <aspsk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Previous commits populated the ->elem_count per-cpu pointer for hash maps.
> Check that this pointer is non-NULL in an existing map.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anton Protopopov <aspsk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/map_ptr_kern.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/map_ptr_kern.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/map_ptr_kern.c
> index db388f593d0a..d6e234a37ccb 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/map_ptr_kern.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/map_ptr_kern.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ struct bpf_map {
>         __u32 value_size;
>         __u32 max_entries;
>         __u32 id;
> +       __s64 *elem_count;
>  } __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
>
>  static inline int check_bpf_map_fields(struct bpf_map *map, __u32 key_size,
> @@ -111,6 +112,8 @@ static inline int check_hash(void)
>
>         VERIFY(check_default_noinline(&hash->map, map));
>
> +       VERIFY(map->elem_count != NULL);
> +

imo that's worse than no test.
Just use kfunc here and get the real count?





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux