From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@cloudflare.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] selftests/bpf: add remaining ASSERT_xxx() variants
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 18:44:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8735vdc7xd.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzYixzoqzE_c+sd7QoQDg8dGaKf_UBf06AqTmCdUagoJvg@mail.gmail.com>
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 8:59 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 1:06 AM Lorenz Bauer <lmb@cloudflare.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 at 00:36, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Add ASSERT_TRUE/ASSERT_FALSE for conditions calculated with custom logic to
>> >> > true/false. Also add remaining arithmetical assertions:
>> >> > - ASSERT_LE -- less than or equal;
>> >> > - ASSERT_GT -- greater than;
>> >> > - ASSERT_GE -- greater than or equal.
>> >> > This should cover most scenarios where people fall back to error-prone
>> >> > CHECK()s.
>> >> >
>> >> > Also extend ASSERT_ERR() to print out errno, in addition to direct error.
>> >> >
>> >> > Also convert few CHECK() instances to ensure new ASSERT_xxx() variants work as
>> >> > expected. Subsequent patch will also use ASSERT_TRUE/ASSERT_FALSE more
>> >> > extensively.
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
>> >> > ---
>> >> > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c | 2 +-
>> >> > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_endian.c | 4 +-
>> >> > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_link.c | 2 +-
>> >> > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfree_skb.c | 2 +-
>> >> > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/resolve_btfids.c | 7 +--
>> >> > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/snprintf_btf.c | 4 +-
>> >> > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h | 50 ++++++++++++++++++-
>> >> > 7 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>> >> >
>> >> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c
>> >> > index c60091ee8a21..5e129dc2073c 100644
>> >> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c
>> >> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c
>> >> > @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ static int test_btf_dump_case(int n, struct btf_dump_test_case *t)
>> >> >
>> >> > snprintf(out_file, sizeof(out_file), "/tmp/%s.output.XXXXXX", t->file);
>> >> > fd = mkstemp(out_file);
>> >> > - if (CHECK(fd < 0, "create_tmp", "failed to create file: %d\n", fd)) {
>> >> > + if (!ASSERT_GE(fd, 0, "create_tmp")) {
>> >>
>> >> Nit: I would find ASSERT_LE easier to read here. Inverting boolean
>> >> conditions is easy to get wrong.
>> >
>> > You mean if (ASSERT_LE(fd, -1, "create_tmp")) { err = fd; goto done; } ?
>> >
>> > That will mark the test failing if fd >= 0, which is exactly opposite
>> > to what we wan't. It's confusing because CHECK() checks invalid
>> > conditions and returns "true" if it holds. But ASSERT_xxx() checks
>> > *valid* condition and returns whether valid condition holds. So the
>> > pattern is always
>>
>> There's already an ASSERT_OK_PTR(), so maybe a corresponding
>> ASSERT_OK_FD() would be handy?
>
> I honestly don't see the point. OK_PTR is special, it checks NULL and
> the special ERR_PTR() variants, which is a lot of hassle to check
> manually. While for FD doing ASSERT_GE(fd, 0) seems to be fine and
> just mostly natural. Also for some APIs valid FD is > 0 and for other
> cases valid FD is plain >= 0, so that just adds to the confusion.
Alright, fair enough. I just wondered because I had the same feeling of
slight awkwardness when I was writing an fd check the other day, so
thought I'd air the thought; but as you say not *really* a big deal, so
I'm also OK with just using LE or GE for this...
-Toke
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-26 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-23 23:30 [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] CO-RE relocation selftests fixes Andrii Nakryiko
2021-04-23 23:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] selftests/bpf: add remaining ASSERT_xxx() variants Andrii Nakryiko
2021-04-26 8:05 ` Lorenz Bauer
2021-04-26 15:50 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-04-26 15:59 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-26 16:15 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-04-26 16:44 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2021-04-23 23:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] libbpf: support BTF_KIND_FLOAT during type compatibility checks in CO-RE Andrii Nakryiko
2021-04-26 8:07 ` Lorenz Bauer
2021-04-23 23:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/5] selftests/bpf: fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro Andrii Nakryiko
2021-04-26 8:10 ` Lorenz Bauer
2021-04-23 23:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] selftests/bpf: fix field existence CO-RE reloc tests Andrii Nakryiko
2021-04-26 8:12 ` Lorenz Bauer
2021-04-23 23:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: fix core_reloc test runner Andrii Nakryiko
2021-04-26 8:16 ` Lorenz Bauer
2021-04-26 15:55 ` Andrii Nakryiko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8735vdc7xd.fsf@toke.dk \
--to=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@fb.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=lmb@cloudflare.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).