Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH bpf-next v7 3/3] selftests/bpf: add testcase for TRACING with 6+ arguments | From | Daniel Borkmann <> | Date | Mon, 26 Jun 2023 16:47:53 +0200 |
| |
On 6/22/23 9:57 AM, menglong8.dong@gmail.com wrote: > From: Menglong Dong <imagedong@tencent.com>
(CC'ing also Florent wrt arm64)
> Add test9/test10 in fexit_test.c and fentry_test.c to test the fentry > and fexit whose target function have 7/11 arguments. > > Correspondingly, add bpf_testmod_fentry_test7() and > bpf_testmod_fentry_test11() to bpf_testmod.c > > Meanwhile, add bpf_modify_return_test2() to test_run.c to test the > MODIFY_RETURN with 7 arguments. > > Add bpf_testmod_test_struct_arg_7/bpf_testmod_test_struct_arg_7 in > bpf_testmod.c to test the struct in the arguments. > > And the testcases passed: > > ./test_progs -t fexit > Summary: 5/12 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > ./test_progs -t fentry > Summary: 3/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > ./test_progs -t modify_return > Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > ./test_progs -t tracing_struct > Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@tencent.com> > Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> > --- > v6: > - add testcases to tracing_struct.c instead of fentry_test.c and > fexit_test.c > v5: > - add testcases for MODIFY_RETURN > v4: > - use different type for args in bpf_testmod_fentry_test{7,12} > - add testcase for grabage values in ctx > v3: > - move bpf_fentry_test{7,12} to bpf_testmod.c and rename them to > bpf_testmod_fentry_test{7,12} meanwhile > - get return value by bpf_get_func_ret() in > "fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12", as we don't change ___bpf_ctx_cast() > in this version > --- > net/bpf/test_run.c | 23 ++++++-- > .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++- > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c | 4 +- > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_test.c | 2 + > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_test.c | 2 + > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/modify_return.c | 20 ++++++- > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tracing_struct.c | 19 +++++++ > .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c | 32 +++++++++++ > .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c | 33 ++++++++++++ > .../selftests/bpf/progs/modify_return.c | 40 ++++++++++++++ > .../selftests/bpf/progs/tracing_struct.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++ > 11 files changed, 271 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
This triggers test failures on arm64 in BPF CI given the additions are not yet supported there:
https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/5371020820/jobs/9743606263 https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/5371020820/jobs/9743606326
[...] Notice: Success: 362/3077, Skipped: 12, Failed: 3 Error: #71 fentry_fexit Error: #71 fentry_fexit test_fentry_fexit:PASS:fentry_skel_load 0 nsec test_fentry_fexit:PASS:fexit_skel_load 0 nsec test_fentry_fexit:FAIL:fentry_attach unexpected error: -1 (errno 524) Error: #72 fentry_test Error: #72 fentry_test test_fentry_test:PASS:fentry_skel_load 0 nsec fentry_test:FAIL:fentry_attach unexpected error: -1 (errno 524) test_fentry_test:FAIL:fentry_first_attach unexpected error: -1 (errno 524) Error: #76 fexit_test Error: #76 fexit_test test_fexit_test:PASS:fexit_skel_load 0 nsec fexit_test:FAIL:fexit_attach unexpected error: -1 (errno 524) test_fexit_test:FAIL:fexit_first_attach unexpected error: -1 (errno 524) [...]
I think probably the best way would be to separate the new test cases and then update tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64 to exclude them from being run on arm64 until support gets added there too.
Thanks, Daniel
| |