Hi Stanislav,
On 2/27/25 11:08 PM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
On 02/27, Bastien Curutchet (eBPF Foundation) wrote:
A fair amount of code duplication is present among tests to attach BPF
programs.
Create generic_attach* helpers that attach BPF programs to a given
interface.
Use ASSERT_OK_FD() instead of ASSERT_GE() to check fd's validity.
Use these helpers in all the available tests.
Signed-off-by: Bastien Curutchet (eBPF Foundation) <bastien.curutchet@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
.../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c | 128 ++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c
index cec746e77cd3abdf561cfc2422fa0a934fc481cd..27a8c8caa87e4c6b39b2b26c2aa9860b131a70a9 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c
@@ -397,6 +397,56 @@ static int attach_tc_prog(struct bpf_tc_hook *hook, int igr_fd, int egr_fd)
return 0;
}
+static int generic_attach(const char *dev, int igr_fd, int egr_fd)
+{
+ DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_hook, tc_hook, .attach_point = BPF_TC_INGRESS);
nit: .attach_point = BPF_TC_INGRESS is a bit confusing to me here
(because we later attach both ingress and egress progs); mostly
because the way attach_tc_prog is written I think. Can we move
tc_hook definition to attach_tc_prog and make it
.attach_point=BPF_TC_INGRESS|BPF_TC_EGRESS? And then we can make
attach_tc_prog accept ifindex instead of tc_hook.
int attach_tc_prog(int ifindex, igr_fd, egr_fd)
{
DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_hook, tc_hook, .attach_point = BPF_TC_INGRESS|BPF_TC_EGRESS);
bpf_tc_hook_create(&tc_hook);
if (igr_fd >= 0) {
tc_hook.attach_point = BPF_TC_INGRESS;
...
}
if (egr_fd >= 0) {
tc_hook.attach_point = BPF_TC_EGRESS;
...
}
}
Or is it just me?
I agree with you, it will be better this way. I'll do it in V2.
Best regards,
Bastien
