On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 6:05 PM Matteo Croce wrote: > Okay, I've addressed all comments but the test one. > > I pushed it to a local fork of meta-oe here: > > https://github.com/teknoraver/meta-openembedded/commit/679944b06ffc564b4b99eae5d934f742bb2a9c09 > > Which kind of test needs to be done here? > A selftest to be run with oe-selftest? A ptest? A tool copied into the > image? > Adding Richard, since he's the one that has the final decision if this gets into oe-core and if the testing is sufficient. I'd suggest looking at the valgrind and the systemtap tests. They are similarly low level tools, with kernel bindings and they both have tests. Something that exercises basic sanity, and runs a few basic tests. I'd expect that the outcome would also be a user of the library in oe-core, which is basically a pre-requisite to get it into core. It doesn't have to be extensive, since it can be extended later. Bruce > If we just need to check if the bpf() syscall is supported, there is > bpftool packaged already, which can list the loaded programs like: > > # bpftool prog > 3: cgroup_device tag 3a32ccd9e03ea87a gpl > loaded_at 2021-02-17T11:50:08+0100 uid 0 > xlated 504B jited 309B memlock 4096B > 4: cgroup_skb tag 6deef7357e7b4530 gpl > loaded_at 2021-02-17T11:50:08+0100 uid 0 > xlated 64B jited 54B memlock 4096B > ... > > Regards, > -- > per aspera ad upstream > -- - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II