From: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-team@cloudflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 8/8] selftests/bpf: Add tests for attaching bpf_link to netns
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 15:29:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lflc2no9.fsf@cloudflare.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzZEDArh8kL-mredwYb=GAOXEue=rGAjOaM0qGjj5RG6RA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 08:08 AM CEST, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:16 PM Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com> wrote:
>>
>> Extend the existing test case for flow dissector attaching to cover:
>>
>> - link creation,
>> - link updates,
>> - link info querying,
>> - mixing links with direct prog attachment.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
>> ---
>
> You are not using bpf_program__attach_netns() at all. Would be nice to
> actually use higher-level API here...
That's true. I didn't exercise the high-level API. I can cover that.
>
> Also... what's up with people using CHECK_FAIL + perror instead of
> CHECK? Is CHECK being avoided for some reason or people are just not
> aware of it (which is strange, because CHECK was there before
> CHECK_FAIL)?
I can only speak for myself. Funnily enough I think I've switched from
CHECK to CHECK_FAIL when I touched on BPF flow dissector last time [0].
CHECK needs and "external" duration variable to be in scope, and so it
was suggested to me that if I'm not measuring run-time with
bpf_prog_test_run, CHECK_FAIL might be a better choice.
CHECK is also perhaps too verbose because it emits a log message on
success (to report duration, I assume).
You have a better overview of all the tests than me, but if I had the
cycles I'd see if renaming CHECK to something more specific, for those
test that actually track prog run time, can work.
-jkbs
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/87imov1y5m.fsf@cloudflare.com/
>
>> .../bpf/prog_tests/flow_dissector_reattach.c | 500 +++++++++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 471 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>>
>
> [...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-28 13:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-27 17:08 [PATCH bpf-next 0/8] Link-based program attachment to network namespaces Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 17:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/8] flow_dissector: Don't grab update-side lock on prog detach from pre_exit Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 17:35 ` sdf
2020-05-27 17:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/8] flow_dissector: Pull locking up from prog attach callback Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 17:35 ` sdf
2020-05-27 17:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/8] net: Introduce netns_bpf for BPF programs attached to netns Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 17:40 ` sdf
2020-05-27 19:31 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 20:36 ` sdf
2020-05-27 17:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/8] flow_dissector: Move out netns_bpf prog callbacks Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 17:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/8] bpf: Add link-based BPF program attachment to network namespace Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 17:48 ` sdf
2020-05-27 19:54 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 20:38 ` sdf
2020-05-28 10:34 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 20:53 ` sdf
2020-05-28 11:03 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-28 16:09 ` sdf
2020-05-28 2:54 ` kbuild test robot
2020-06-04 23:38 ` Nick Desaulniers
2020-06-05 14:41 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-28 5:56 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-05-28 12:26 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-28 18:09 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-05-28 18:48 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-05-28 13:30 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 17:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 6/8] libbpf: Add support for bpf_link-based netns attachment Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-28 5:59 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-05-28 13:05 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 17:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 7/8] bpftool: Support link show for netns-attached links Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-28 6:02 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-05-28 13:10 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-27 17:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 8/8] selftests/bpf: Add tests for attaching bpf_link to netns Jakub Sitnicki
2020-05-28 6:08 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-05-28 13:29 ` Jakub Sitnicki [this message]
2020-05-28 18:31 ` 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=87lflc2no9.fsf@cloudflare.com \
--to=jakub@cloudflare.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@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).