From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84CD8ECE587 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 21:31:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A64D215EA for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 21:31:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="W26cn0yO" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727881AbfJAVbO (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Oct 2019 17:31:14 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f194.google.com ([209.85.160.194]:37386 "EHLO mail-qt1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726943AbfJAVbO (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Oct 2019 17:31:14 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f194.google.com with SMTP id l3so23606924qtr.4; Tue, 01 Oct 2019 14:31:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=H03/7bvNNBNTOdxvTEc5izwmYBaCQnPa6PU2xDhsBpU=; b=W26cn0yOFQyamHCrFN+JCYUsIp+K3+RUY+HX5hOaLVAaWHfv/M1+gzNd5TURhIhVNQ Jb8QqxFtkSMq9Ah7YUSCC4HYL4oQcnpmeaYDA8cdfamNFomivcADv0Do9axibJMHtX1w 4u6S7BR0BnNz3/BtmAGzJ43hllSsxoo2l/4Fa1eMm8fxprdfI5LzgGur2Ov9ziQC+0QW Kn+gFvcHaup0nQ72LOblCNbv4jKuIwbemrMD6FcN2G/ZUj4JTuqkbSzSFHuyxOPDd4J9 dIPTivkNtLpUHuFlHFznBJN3VZCBT5rkJh+BLz0IDRNRaatnbe50DcfDS9r+Y9vQjDYx ukUw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=H03/7bvNNBNTOdxvTEc5izwmYBaCQnPa6PU2xDhsBpU=; b=CEX3IC3T/aZqNvl+qans9zIB1BexB9KlN8PjAbHTKqsdM74JTaYLtxh79/05UgKZ44 39RXxjKCaIyVIZemgk9Fz/YX12ScPJLFW9MJxDLblgSvJ4zaVkctA7zRz2/X708VDlU5 kuTulksphk06te5CoYoLH+sYk2bTJwIh9Sll0vEKvcSDEFkt+BNFOudIYCGKFCQz4GwE OKNrozzScNGjfby/hUi3FnABoxrefHFeOb8YmRLJfcrkA+x4Urm8ICSgdBJdQCikfZ5e CPD6A23AMvz7ZhW7phkWHqIwf7UDm6ymA0gg3ZZrUEfcvOj7gYFl4CV2j/FkTlFXPhn4 zqxA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU0IaPLBLoEVfSNB8pjaEGic3rPZ8/3nDnikxgUncG7+y+SMMXs ExRLgSQo2W44JCndFIDLPiBMySsBNKMStjDyD/E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxafwz9gOfLJ6bIosFFj58XKKXq6uA0QG3Ap2BmwjfB2TUFj67lKMHNkU6nsVk4eyXxGh2jMO2JQsZWzA4TM4E= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7401:: with SMTP id p1mr464592qtq.141.1569965473477; Tue, 01 Oct 2019 14:31:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190930185855.4115372-1-andriin@fb.com> <20190930185855.4115372-6-andriin@fb.com> <5d93a58be3b5f_85b2b0fc76de5b4e@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <5d93a58be3b5f_85b2b0fc76de5b4e@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> From: Andrii Nakryiko Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 14:31:02 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 5/6] selftests/bpf: adjust CO-RE reloc tests for new BPF_CORE_READ macro To: John Fastabend Cc: Andrii Nakryiko , bpf , Networking , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Kernel Team Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 12:14 PM John Fastabend wrote: > > Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > Given introduction of variadic BPF_CORE_READ with slightly different > > syntax and semantics, define CORE_READ, which is a thin wrapper around > > low-level bpf_core_read() macro, which in turn is just a wrapper around > > bpf_probe_read(). BPF_CORE_READ is higher-level variadic macro > > supporting multi-pointer reads and are tested separately. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko > > --- > > .../bpf/progs/test_core_reloc_arrays.c | 10 ++++++---- > > .../bpf/progs/test_core_reloc_flavors.c | 8 +++++--- > > .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_core_reloc_ints.c | 18 ++++++++++-------- > > .../bpf/progs/test_core_reloc_kernel.c | 6 ++++-- > > .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_core_reloc_misc.c | 8 +++++--- > > .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_core_reloc_mods.c | 18 ++++++++++-------- > > .../bpf/progs/test_core_reloc_nesting.c | 6 ++++-- > > .../bpf/progs/test_core_reloc_primitives.c | 12 +++++++----- > > .../bpf/progs/test_core_reloc_ptr_as_arr.c | 4 +++- > > 9 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) > > > > Starting to get many layers of macros here but makes sense here. Yeah, a bit. I was considering to either switch to bpf_core_read() with explicit sizeof or making bpf_core_read() deriving sizeof(), but didn't because: 1. wanted to keep bpf_core_read() a direct "substitute" for bpf_probe_read() 2. figured one copy-pasted #define for each of few files is small enough price for much more readable tests > > Acked-by: John Fastabend Thanks for review!