From: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, oss-drivers@netronome.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] selftests: bpf: extend sub-register mode compilation to all bpf object files
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 11:47:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <644AE5C7-8D19-4368-BE5E-459BB7F5A620@netronome.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190211040412.wvulodgvz3jcnida@ast-mbp>
> On 11 Feb 2019, at 04:04, Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 05:41:20PM +0000, Jiong Wang wrote:
>> At the moment, we only do extra sub-register mode compilation on bpf object
>> files used by "test_progs". These object files are really loaded and
>> executed.
>>
>> This patch further extends sub-register mode compilation to all bpf object
>> files, even those without corresponding runtime tests. Because this could
>> help testing LLVM sub-register code-gen, kernel bpf selftest has much more
>> C testcases with reasonable size and complexity compared with LLVM
>> testsuite which only contains unit tests.
>>
>> There were some file duplication inside BPF_OBJ_FILES_DUAL_COMPILE which
>> is removed now.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
>> ---
>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 21 ++++++++-------------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>> index 383d2ff..70b2570 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>> @@ -35,20 +35,15 @@ BPF_OBJ_FILES = \
>> sendmsg4_prog.o sendmsg6_prog.o test_lirc_mode2_kern.o \
>> get_cgroup_id_kern.o socket_cookie_prog.o test_select_reuseport_kern.o \
>> test_skb_cgroup_id_kern.o bpf_flow.o netcnt_prog.o test_xdp_vlan.o \
>> - xdp_dummy.o test_map_in_map.o test_spin_lock.o test_map_lock.o
>> -
>> -# Objects are built with default compilation flags and with sub-register
>> -# code-gen enabled.
>> -BPF_OBJ_FILES_DUAL_COMPILE = \
>> - test_pkt_access.o test_pkt_access.o test_xdp.o test_adjust_tail.o \
>> - test_l4lb.o test_l4lb_noinline.o test_xdp_noinline.o test_tcp_estats.o \
>> + xdp_dummy.o test_map_in_map.o test_spin_lock.o test_map_lock.o \
>> + test_pkt_access.o test_xdp.o test_adjust_tail.o test_l4lb.o \
>> + test_l4lb_noinline.o test_xdp_noinline.o test_tcp_estats.o \
>> test_obj_id.o test_pkt_md_access.o test_tracepoint.o \
>> - test_stacktrace_map.o test_stacktrace_map.o test_stacktrace_build_id.o \
>> - test_stacktrace_build_id.o test_get_stack_rawtp.o \
>> - test_get_stack_rawtp.o test_tracepoint.o test_sk_lookup_kern.o \
>> - test_queue_map.o test_stack_map.o
>> + test_stacktrace_map.o test_stacktrace_build_id.o \
>> + test_get_stack_rawtp.o test_sk_lookup_kern.o test_queue_map.o \
>> + test_stack_map.o
>>
>> -TEST_GEN_FILES = $(BPF_OBJ_FILES) $(BPF_OBJ_FILES_DUAL_COMPILE)
>> +TEST_GEN_FILES = $(BPF_OBJ_FILES)
>>
>> # Also test sub-register code-gen if LLVM + kernel both has eBPF v3 processor
>> # support which is the first version to contain both ALU32 and JMP32
>> @@ -58,7 +53,7 @@ SUBREG_CODEGEN := $(shell echo "int cal(int a) { return a > 0; }" | \
>> $(LLC) -mattr=+alu32 -mcpu=probe 2>&1 | \
>> grep 'if w')
>
> build and test servers can be different.
> Would it make sense to use -mcpu=v3 instead of -mcpu=probe ?
Have the same thoughts initially, but was worried the situation where doing native
bpf selftest, build/test on same machine and llvm is new but kernel is old.
I think remove the runtime kernel criteria make sense if for bpf selftest, separation
between build and test server are often, for example cross-compilation are used.
Will add a new patch to make this change.
>
> Also while testing test_progs_32 fails like this:
> libbpf: failed to open ./bpf_flow.o: No such file or directory
> libbpf: failed to open ./test_spin_lock.o: No such file or directory
> test_spin_lock:bpf_prog_load errno 2
>
> Do you see the same ?
Hmm, I haven’t see the same. This is expected to happen before this patch, but should
not after. Because bpf_flow and test_spin_lock were added after the initial JMP32 patch
set.
Noticed there is patch conflict between this patch and KaFai’s latest test_sock_fields
change. Perhaps this patch hasn’t been applied successfully when doing the test on your
env?
Regards,
Jiong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-11 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-08 17:41 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] selftests: bpf: improve bpf object file rules Jiong Wang
2019-02-08 17:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] selftests: bpf: add "alu32" to .gitignore Jiong Wang
2019-02-08 17:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] selftests: bpf: extend sub-register mode compilation to all bpf object files Jiong Wang
2019-02-11 4:04 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-02-11 11:47 ` Jiong Wang [this message]
2019-02-08 17:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] selftests: bpf: centre kernel bpf objects under new subdir "kern_progs" Jiong Wang
2019-02-11 4:06 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-02-11 11:47 ` Jiong Wang
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=644AE5C7-8D19-4368-BE5E-459BB7F5A620@netronome.com \
--to=jiong.wang@netronome.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oss-drivers@netronome.com \
/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).