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

From: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@gmail.com>
To: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: olsajiri@gmail.com, 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, 2 Jun 2023 16:47:54 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADxym3bc-jY=My6iHivuani1PH838yHjdVejAcXwWk0N5Qomkg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <69103b6f490309c381432cae5fdabf02d80a4397.camel@linux.ibm.com>

On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 4:24 PM Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> 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?

Oops, I missed this part......Thank you for reminding,
and I'll fix it in V3.

Thanks!
Menglong Dong