Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 5/5] selftests/bpf: add testcase for FENTRY/FEXIT with 6+ arguments

From: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
To: menglong8.dong@gmail.com, olsajiri@gmail.com
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, dsahern@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org,
	daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev,
	song@kernel.org, yhs@fb.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
	kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@google.com, haoluo@google.com,
	jolsa@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
	bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
	hpa@zytor.com, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
	pabeni@redhat.com, mykolal@fb.com, shuah@kernel.org,
	benbjiang@tencent.com, imagedong@tencent.com,
	xukuohai@huawei.com, chantr4@gmail.com, zwisler@google.com,
	eddyz87@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 5/5] selftests/bpf: add testcase for FENTRY/FEXIT with 6+ arguments
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2023 10:24:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <69103b6f490309c381432cae5fdabf02d80a4397.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230602065958.2869555-6-imagedong@tencent.com>

On Fri, 2023-06-02 at 14:59 +0800, menglong8.dong@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Menglong Dong <imagedong@tencent.com>
> 
> Add test7/test12/test14 in fexit_test.c and fentry_test.c to test the
> fentry and fexit whose target function have 7/12/14 arguments.
> 
> And the testcases passed:
> 
> ./test_progs -t fexit
> $71      fentry_fexit:OK
> $73/1    fexit_bpf2bpf/target_no_callees:OK
> $73/2    fexit_bpf2bpf/target_yes_callees:OK
> $73/3    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace:OK
> $73/4    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_verify:OK
> $73/5    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_sockmap_update:OK
> $73/6    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_return_code:OK
> $73/7    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_map_prog_compatibility:OK
> $73/8    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_multi:OK
> $73/9    fexit_bpf2bpf/fmod_ret_freplace:OK
> $73/10   fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_global_func:OK
> $73/11   fexit_bpf2bpf/fentry_to_cgroup_bpf:OK
> $73/12   fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_progmap:OK
> $73      fexit_bpf2bpf:OK
> $74      fexit_sleep:OK
> $75      fexit_stress:OK
> $76      fexit_test:OK
> Summary: 5/12 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
> 
> ./test_progs -t fentry
> $71      fentry_fexit:OK
> $72      fentry_test:OK
> $140     module_fentry_shadow:OK
> Summary: 3/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jiang Biao <benbjiang@tencent.com>
> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@tencent.com>
> ---
>  net/bpf/test_run.c                            | 30 +++++++++++++++-
>  .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c | 34
> ++++++++++++++++++
>  .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c  | 35
> +++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 98 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Don't you also need

--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ void test_fentry_fexit(void)
        fentry_res = (__u64 *)fentry_skel->bss;
        fexit_res = (__u64 *)fexit_skel->bss;
        printf("%lld\n", fentry_skel->bss->test1_result);
-       for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
+       for (i = 0; i < 11; i++) {
                ASSERT_EQ(fentry_res[i], 1, "fentry result");
                ASSERT_EQ(fexit_res[i], 1, "fexit result");
        }

to verify the results of the new tests?
