Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Song Liu <> | Date | Tue, 9 Jan 2024 09:45:20 -0800 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] find_vma BPF test: increase length CPU computation |
| |
On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 1:57 AM Alessandro Carminati (Red Hat) <alessandro.carminati@gmail.com> wrote: > > Some aarch64 systems running a PREEMPT_RT patched kernel, needs > more time to complete the test. > This change mirrors: > commit ba83af059153 ("Improve stability of find_vma BPF test") > addressing similar requirements and allowing the QTI SA8775P based > systems, and others, to complete the test when running RT kernel. > > Signed-off-by: Alessandro Carminati (Red Hat) <alessandro.carminati@gmailcom> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/find_vma.c | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/find_vma.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/find_vma.c > index 5165b38f0e59..43d62db8d57b 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/find_vma.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/find_vma.c > @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ static void test_find_vma_pe(struct find_vma *skel) > struct bpf_link *link = NULL; > volatile int j = 0; > int pfd, i; > - const int one_bn = 1000000000; > + const int dummy_wait = 2500000000;
2500000000 is bigger than INT_MAX.
> > pfd = open_pe(); > if (pfd < 0) { > @@ -68,10 +68,10 @@ static void test_find_vma_pe(struct find_vma *skel) > if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_perf_event")) > goto cleanup; > > - for (i = 0; i < one_bn && find_vma_pe_condition(skel); ++i) > + for (i = 0; i < dummy_wait && find_vma_pe_condition(skel); ++i) > ++j;
So we will skip this loop. Right?
Thanks, Song
> > - test_and_reset_skel(skel, -EBUSY /* in nmi, irq_work is busy */, i == one_bn); > + test_and_reset_skel(skel, -EBUSY /* in nmi, irq_work is busy */, i == dummy_wait); > cleanup: > bpf_link__destroy(link); > close(pfd); > -- > 2.34.1 >
| |