All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <ovzxemul@gmail.com>,
	Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander@mihalicyn.com>,
	Andrei Vagin <avagin@gmail.com>,
	criu@openvz.org, io-uring@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/10] selftests/bpf: Test partial reads for io_uring, epoll iterators
Date: Wed,  1 Dec 2021 09:53:31 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211201042333.2035153-9-memxor@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211201042333.2035153-1-memxor@gmail.com>

Ensure that the output is consistent in face of partial reads that
return to userspace and then resume again later. To this end, we do
reads in 1-byte chunks, which is a bit stupid in real life, but works
well to simulate interrupted iteration. This also tests case where
seq_file buffer is consumed (after seq_printf) on interrupted read
before iterator invoked BPF prog again.

Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c       | 33 ++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c
index cc0555c5b373..3a07fdf31874 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c
@@ -73,13 +73,13 @@ static void do_dummy_read(struct bpf_program *prog)
 	bpf_link__destroy(link);
 }
 
-static int read_fd_into_buffer(int fd, char *buf, int size)
+static int __read_fd_into_buffer(int fd, char *buf, int size, size_t chunks)
 {
 	int bufleft = size;
 	int len;
 
 	do {
-		len = read(fd, buf, bufleft);
+		len = read(fd, buf, chunks ?: bufleft);
 		if (len > 0) {
 			buf += len;
 			bufleft -= len;
@@ -89,6 +89,11 @@ static int read_fd_into_buffer(int fd, char *buf, int size)
 	return len < 0 ? len : size - bufleft;
 }
 
+static int read_fd_into_buffer(int fd, char *buf, int size)
+{
+	return __read_fd_into_buffer(fd, buf, size, 0);
+}
+
 static void test_ipv6_route(void)
 {
 	struct bpf_iter_ipv6_route *skel;
@@ -1301,7 +1306,7 @@ static int io_uring_inode_match(int link_fd, int io_uring_fd)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-void test_io_uring_buf(void)
+void test_io_uring_buf(bool partial)
 {
 	DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_iter_attach_opts, opts);
 	char rbuf[4096], buf[4096] = "B\n";
@@ -1375,7 +1380,7 @@ void test_io_uring_buf(void)
 	if (!ASSERT_GE(iter_fd, 0, "bpf_iter_create"))
 		goto end_close_fd;
 
-	ret = read_fd_into_buffer(iter_fd, rbuf, sizeof(rbuf));
+	ret = __read_fd_into_buffer(iter_fd, rbuf, sizeof(rbuf), partial);
 	if (!ASSERT_GT(ret, 0, "read_fd_into_buffer"))
 		goto end_close_iter;
 
@@ -1396,7 +1401,7 @@ void test_io_uring_buf(void)
 	bpf_iter_io_uring__destroy(skel);
 }
 
-void test_io_uring_file(void)
+void test_io_uring_file(bool partial)
 {
 	int reg_files[] = { [0 ... 7] = -1 };
 	DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_iter_attach_opts, opts);
@@ -1464,7 +1469,7 @@ void test_io_uring_file(void)
 	if (!ASSERT_OK(ret, "io_uring_register_files"))
 		goto end_iter_fd;
 
-	ret = read_fd_into_buffer(iter_fd, rbuf, sizeof(rbuf));
+	ret = __read_fd_into_buffer(iter_fd, rbuf, sizeof(rbuf), partial);
 	if (!ASSERT_GT(ret, 0, "read_fd_into_buffer(iterator_fd, buf)"))
 		goto end_iter_fd;
 
@@ -1488,7 +1493,7 @@ void test_io_uring_file(void)
 	bpf_iter_io_uring__destroy(skel);
 }
 
-void test_epoll(void)
+void test_epoll(bool partial)
 {
 	const char *fmt = "B\npipe:%d\nsocket:%d\npipe:%d\nsocket:%d\nE\n";
 	DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_iter_attach_opts, opts);
@@ -1554,7 +1559,7 @@ void test_epoll(void)
 	if (!ASSERT_GE(ret, 0, "snprintf") || !ASSERT_LT(ret, sizeof(buf), "snprintf"))
 		goto end_iter_fd;
 
-	ret = read_fd_into_buffer(iter_fd, rbuf, sizeof(rbuf));
+	ret = __read_fd_into_buffer(iter_fd, rbuf, sizeof(rbuf), partial);
 	if (!ASSERT_GT(ret, 0, "read_fd_into_buffer"))
 		goto end_iter_fd;
 
@@ -1666,9 +1671,15 @@ void test_bpf_iter(void)
 	if (test__start_subtest("buf-neg-offset"))
 		test_buf_neg_offset();
 	if (test__start_subtest("io_uring_buf"))
-		test_io_uring_buf();
+		test_io_uring_buf(false);
 	if (test__start_subtest("io_uring_file"))
-		test_io_uring_file();
+		test_io_uring_file(false);
 	if (test__start_subtest("epoll"))
-		test_epoll();
+		test_epoll(false);
+	if (test__start_subtest("io_uring_buf-partial"))
+		test_io_uring_buf(true);
+	if (test__start_subtest("io_uring_file-partial"))
+		test_io_uring_file(true);
+	if (test__start_subtest("epoll-partial"))
+		test_epoll(true);
 }
-- 
2.34.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-12-01  4:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-01  4:23 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/10] Introduce BPF iterators for io_uring and epoll Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-01  4:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/10] io_uring: Implement eBPF iterator for registered buffers Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-01  4:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/10] bpf: Add bpf_page_to_pfn helper Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-01  4:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/10] io_uring: Implement eBPF iterator for registered files Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-01  4:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/10] epoll: Implement eBPF iterator for registered items Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-01  4:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/10] bpftool: Output io_uring iterator info Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-01  4:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/10] selftests/bpf: Add test for io_uring BPF iterators Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-01  4:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/10] selftests/bpf: Add test for epoll BPF iterator Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-01  4:23 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2021-12-01  4:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/10] selftests/bpf: Fix btf_dump test for bpf_iter_link_info Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-12-01  4:23 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v3 10/10] samples/bpf: Add example to checkpoint/restore io_uring Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi

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=20211201042333.2035153-9-memxor@gmail.com \
    --to=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=alexander@mihalicyn.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=avagin@gmail.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=criu@openvz.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ovzxemul@gmail.com \
    --cc=yhs@fb.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.