Re: [bpf-next v3 04/12] selftests/bpf: Use bpf_prog_test_run_xattr

From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
To: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@kinvolk.io>
Cc: "open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Alban Crequy" <alban@kinvolk.io>,
	"Iago López Galeiras" <iago@kinvolk.io>,
	"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
	"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"Martin KaFai Lau" <kafai@fb.com>,
	"Song Liu" <songliubraving@fb.com>, "Yonghong Song" <yhs@fb.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
	"Jesper Dangaard Brouer" <hawk@kernel.org>,
	"John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	"Stanislav Fomichev" <sdf@google.com>,
	Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
	xdp-newbies@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bpf-next v3 04/12] selftests/bpf: Use bpf_prog_test_run_xattr
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 17:03:25 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzZoOw=1B8vV53iAxz8LDULOPVF-he4C_usoUQSdXU+oSg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190708163121.18477-5-krzesimir@kinvolk.io>

On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:43 PM Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@kinvolk.io> wrote:
>
> The bpf_prog_test_run_xattr function gives more options to set up a
> test run of a BPF program than the bpf_prog_test_run function.
>
> We will need this extra flexibility to pass ctx data later.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@kinvolk.io>
> ---

lgtm, with some nits below

Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>

>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> index c7541f572932..1640ba9f12c1 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> @@ -822,14 +822,20 @@ static int do_prog_test_run(int fd_prog, bool unpriv, uint32_t expected_val,
>  {
>         __u8 tmp[TEST_DATA_LEN << 2];
>         __u32 size_tmp = sizeof(tmp);

nit: this is now is not needed as a separate local variable, inline?

> -       uint32_t retval;
>         int saved_errno;
>         int err;
> +       struct bpf_prog_test_run_attr attr = {
> +               .prog_fd = fd_prog,
> +               .repeat = 1,
> +               .data_in = data,
> +               .data_size_in = size_data,
> +               .data_out = tmp,
> +               .data_size_out = size_tmp,
> +       };
>
>         if (unpriv)
>                 set_admin(true);
> -       err = bpf_prog_test_run(fd_prog, 1, data, size_data,
> -                               tmp, &size_tmp, &retval, NULL);
> +       err = bpf_prog_test_run_xattr(&attr);
>         saved_errno = errno;
>         if (unpriv)
>                 set_admin(false);
> @@ -846,9 +852,9 @@ static int do_prog_test_run(int fd_prog, bool unpriv, uint32_t expected_val,
>                         return err;
>                 }
>         }
> -       if (retval != expected_val &&
> +       if (attr.retval != expected_val &&
>             expected_val != POINTER_VALUE) {

this if condition now fits one line, can you please combine? thanks!

> -               printf("FAIL retval %d != %d ", retval, expected_val);
> +               printf("FAIL retval %d != %d ", attr.retval, expected_val);
>                 return 1;
>         }
>
> --
> 2.20.1
>