* [PATCH] libtracefs: Unit test for the tracing filter API
@ 2021-04-03 2:01 Sameeruddin shaik
2021-04-02 14:56 ` Steven Rostedt
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Sameeruddin shaik @ 2021-04-03 2:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rostedt; +Cc: linux-trace-devel, tz.stoyanov, Sameeruddin shaik
tracefs_function_filter();
Signed-off-by: Sameeruddin shaik <sameeruddin.shaik8@gmail.com>
diff --git a/utest/tracefs-utest.c b/utest/tracefs-utest.c
index ed2693b..09e564f 100644
--- a/utest/tracefs-utest.c
+++ b/utest/tracefs-utest.c
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
#include <time.h>
#include <dirent.h>
#include <ftw.h>
+#include <errno.h>
#include <CUnit/CUnit.h>
#include <CUnit/Basic.h>
@@ -1020,6 +1021,80 @@ static void test_custom_trace_dir(void)
free(dname);
}
+static int test_instance_filter(struct tracefs_instance *instance,
+ const char **filters, const char *module,
+ int flags)
+{
+ int ret;
+ int i;
+
+ if (filters) {
+ for (i = 0; filters[i]; i++) {
+ ret = tracefs_function_filter(instance, filters[i],
+ module, flags);
+ if (ret) {
+ if (errno == EINVAL)
+ printf("Filter %s did not match\n",
+ filters[i]);
+ else
+ printf("Failed writing %s\n",
+ filters[i]);
+ }
+ }
+ } else {
+ ret = tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, module, flags);
+ }
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static void test_tracefs_function_filter(void)
+{
+ const char *filter[] = {"run_init_process", "ufs*", "^ext4.*$", NULL};
+ const char *future_filter[] = {"write_dummy", "read_dummy", NULL};
+ const char *future_module = "dummy";
+ struct tracefs_instance *instance;
+ const char *module = "btrtl";
+ int ret;
+
+ instance = tracefs_instance_create(TEST_INSTANCE_NAME);
+ CU_TEST(instance != NULL);
+
+ ret = tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL,
+ TRACEFS_FL_RESET | TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
+ if (ret) {
+ printf("Failed to reset the filter\n");
+ if (ret < 0)
+ tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL, 0);
+ }
+ /* Test string, kernel glob and regex for specific_instance*/
+ ret = test_instance_filter(instance, filter, NULL, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
+ CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
+ /* Test Module only with no filters*/
+ ret = test_instance_filter(instance, NULL, module, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
+ CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
+ ret = test_instance_filter(instance, future_filter, future_module,
+ TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE | TRACEFS_FL_FUTURE);
+ CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
+ tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL, 0);
+
+ ret = tracefs_function_filter(NULL, NULL, NULL,
+ TRACEFS_FL_RESET | TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
+ if (ret) {
+ printf("Failed to reset the filter\n");
+ if (ret < 0)
+ tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL, 0);
+ }
+ /* Test top instance*/
+ ret = test_instance_filter(NULL, filter, NULL, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
+ CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
+ ret = test_instance_filter(NULL, NULL, module, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
+ CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
+ ret = test_instance_filter(NULL, future_filter, future_module,
+ TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE | TRACEFS_FL_FUTURE);
+ CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
+ tracefs_function_filter(NULL, NULL, NULL, 0);
+}
+
static int test_suite_destroy(void)
{
tracefs_instance_destroy(test_instance);
@@ -1075,4 +1150,6 @@ void test_tracefs_lib(void)
test_tracing_options);
CU_add_test(suite, "custom system directory",
test_custom_trace_dir);
+ CU_add_test(suite, "Set Filter API",
+ test_tracefs_function_filter);
}
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] libtracefs: Unit test for the tracing filter API
2021-04-03 2:01 [PATCH] libtracefs: Unit test for the tracing filter API Sameeruddin shaik
@ 2021-04-02 14:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2021-04-07 0:44 ` sameeruddin shaik
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-04-02 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sameeruddin shaik; +Cc: linux-trace-devel, tz.stoyanov
On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 07:31:00 +0530
Sameeruddin shaik <sameeruddin.shaik8@gmail.com> wrote:
> tracefs_function_filter();
Need some more information in the change log. What is this testing?
>
> Signed-off-by: Sameeruddin shaik <sameeruddin.shaik8@gmail.com>
>
> diff --git a/utest/tracefs-utest.c b/utest/tracefs-utest.c
> index ed2693b..09e564f 100644
> --- a/utest/tracefs-utest.c
> +++ b/utest/tracefs-utest.c
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> #include <time.h>
> #include <dirent.h>
> #include <ftw.h>
> +#include <errno.h>
>
> #include <CUnit/CUnit.h>
> #include <CUnit/Basic.h>
> @@ -1020,6 +1021,80 @@ static void test_custom_trace_dir(void)
> free(dname);
> }
>
> +static int test_instance_filter(struct tracefs_instance *instance,
> + const char **filters, const char *module,
> + int flags)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + int i;
> +
> + if (filters) {
> + for (i = 0; filters[i]; i++) {
> + ret = tracefs_function_filter(instance, filters[i],
> + module, flags);
> + if (ret) {
> + if (errno == EINVAL)
> + printf("Filter %s did not match\n",
> + filters[i]);
> + else
> + printf("Failed writing %s\n",
> + filters[i]);
> + }
> + }
> + } else {
> + ret = tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, module, flags);
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static void test_tracefs_function_filter(void)
> +{
> + const char *filter[] = {"run_init_process", "ufs*", "^ext4.*$", NULL};
I ran this and it failed, because my box has no functions that start with
"ufs" nor "ext4" (I use an xfs file system).
You need to use core function names like "sched*" or "irq*", because ufs
and ext4 are modules that do not exist in all machines that this may be
executed on.
> + const char *future_filter[] = {"write_dummy", "read_dummy", NULL};
> + const char *future_module = "dummy";
> + struct tracefs_instance *instance;
> + const char *module = "btrtl";
I also do not have the btrtl module. You may need to see what modules are
loaded (reading /proc/modules will help you there).
> + int ret;
> +
> + instance = tracefs_instance_create(TEST_INSTANCE_NAME);
> + CU_TEST(instance != NULL);
> +
> + ret = tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL,
> + TRACEFS_FL_RESET | TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
> + if (ret) {
> + printf("Failed to reset the filter\n");
Should the above be a CU_TEST failure?
> + if (ret < 0)
> + tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL, 0);
> + }
> + /* Test string, kernel glob and regex for specific_instance*/
> + ret = test_instance_filter(instance, filter, NULL, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
> + /* Test Module only with no filters*/
> + ret = test_instance_filter(instance, NULL, module, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
> + ret = test_instance_filter(instance, future_filter, future_module,
> + TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE | TRACEFS_FL_FUTURE);
> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
> + tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL, 0);
Should the above result also be tested?
> +
> + ret = tracefs_function_filter(NULL, NULL, NULL,
> + TRACEFS_FL_RESET | TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
> + if (ret) {
And here too.
> + printf("Failed to reset the filter\n");
> + if (ret < 0)
> + tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL, 0);
> + }
> + /* Test top instance*/
> + ret = test_instance_filter(NULL, filter, NULL, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
> + ret = test_instance_filter(NULL, NULL, module, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
As I stated above, I don't have the module you picked, and will most
definitely fail this test as FUTURE is not set.
> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
> + ret = test_instance_filter(NULL, future_filter, future_module,
> + TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE | TRACEFS_FL_FUTURE);
> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
> + tracefs_function_filter(NULL, NULL, NULL, 0);
> +}
Anyway, this is a good start.
Thanks!
-- Steve
> +
> static int test_suite_destroy(void)
> {
> tracefs_instance_destroy(test_instance);
> @@ -1075,4 +1150,6 @@ void test_tracefs_lib(void)
> test_tracing_options);
> CU_add_test(suite, "custom system directory",
> test_custom_trace_dir);
> + CU_add_test(suite, "Set Filter API",
> + test_tracefs_function_filter);
> }
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] libtracefs: Unit test for the tracing filter API
2021-04-02 14:56 ` Steven Rostedt
@ 2021-04-07 0:44 ` sameeruddin shaik
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: sameeruddin shaik @ 2021-04-07 0:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Rostedt; +Cc: linux-trace-devel, tz.stoyanov
On 02/04/21 8:26 pm, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Apr 2021 07:31:00 +0530
> Sameeruddin shaik <sameeruddin.shaik8@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> tracefs_function_filter();
> Need some more information in the change log. What is this testing?
>
>> Signed-off-by: Sameeruddin shaik <sameeruddin.shaik8@gmail.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/utest/tracefs-utest.c b/utest/tracefs-utest.c
>> index ed2693b..09e564f 100644
>> --- a/utest/tracefs-utest.c
>> +++ b/utest/tracefs-utest.c
>> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
>> #include <time.h>
>> #include <dirent.h>
>> #include <ftw.h>
>> +#include <errno.h>
>>
>> #include <CUnit/CUnit.h>
>> #include <CUnit/Basic.h>
>> @@ -1020,6 +1021,80 @@ static void test_custom_trace_dir(void)
>> free(dname);
>> }
>>
>> +static int test_instance_filter(struct tracefs_instance *instance,
>> + const char **filters, const char *module,
>> + int flags)
>> +{
>> + int ret;
>> + int i;
>> +
>> + if (filters) {
>> + for (i = 0; filters[i]; i++) {
>> + ret = tracefs_function_filter(instance, filters[i],
>> + module, flags);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + if (errno == EINVAL)
>> + printf("Filter %s did not match\n",
>> + filters[i]);
>> + else
>> + printf("Failed writing %s\n",
>> + filters[i]);
>> + }
>> + }
>> + } else {
>> + ret = tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, module, flags);
>> + }
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void test_tracefs_function_filter(void)
>> +{
>> + const char *filter[] = {"run_init_process", "ufs*", "^ext4.*$", NULL};
> I ran this and it failed, because my box has no functions that start with
> "ufs" nor "ext4" (I use an xfs file system).
>
> You need to use core function names like "sched*" or "irq*", because ufs
> and ext4 are modules that do not exist in all machines that this may be
> executed on.
>
>> + const char *future_filter[] = {"write_dummy", "read_dummy", NULL};
>> + const char *future_module = "dummy";
>> + struct tracefs_instance *instance;
>> + const char *module = "btrtl";
> I also do not have the btrtl module. You may need to see what modules are
> loaded (reading /proc/modules will help you there).
>
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + instance = tracefs_instance_create(TEST_INSTANCE_NAME);
>> + CU_TEST(instance != NULL);
>> +
>> + ret = tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL,
>> + TRACEFS_FL_RESET | TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + printf("Failed to reset the filter\n");
> Should the above be a CU_TEST failure?
> + if (ret < 0)
> + tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL, 0);
> + }
> + /* Test string, kernel glob and regex for specific_instance*/
> + ret = test_instance_filter(instance, filter, NULL, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
> + /* Test Module only with no filters*/
> + ret = test_instance_filter(instance, NULL, module, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
> + ret = test_instance_filter(instance, future_filter, future_module,
> + TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE | TRACEFS_FL_FUTURE);
> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
> + tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL, 0);
> Should the above result also be tested?
Is it really needs to be tested?, because anyhow if we have any error,
it will be thrown at the above lines
But anyhow, i will test the result here, since we are commiting the
changes in the file.
>> +
>> + ret = tracefs_function_filter(NULL, NULL, NULL,
>> + TRACEFS_FL_RESET | TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
>> + if (ret) {
> And here too.
okay.
>> + printf("Failed to reset the filter\n");
>> + if (ret < 0)
>> + tracefs_function_filter(instance, NULL, NULL, 0);
>> + }
>> + /* Test top instance*/
>> + ret = test_instance_filter(NULL, filter, NULL, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
>> + CU_ASSERT(ret == 0);
>> + ret = test_instance_filter(NULL, NULL, module, TRACEFS_FL_CONTINUE);
> As I stated above, I don't have the module you picked, and will most
> definitely fail this test as FUTURE is not set.
Yeah will try to add some standard modules.
Thanks,
sameer.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-04-06 0:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-04-03 2:01 [PATCH] libtracefs: Unit test for the tracing filter API Sameeruddin shaik
2021-04-02 14:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2021-04-07 0:44 ` sameeruddin shaik
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.