All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
	Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] selftests/bpf: Fix possible/online index mismatch in perf_buffer test
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 13:41:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211021114132.8196-3-jolsa@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211021114132.8196-1-jolsa@kernel.org>

The perf_buffer fails on system with offline cpus:

  # test_progs -t perf_buffer
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:nr_cpus 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:nr_on_cpus 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:attach_kprobe 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:perf_buf__new 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:epoll_fd 0 nsec
  skipping offline CPU #4
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:perf_buffer__poll 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:seen_cpu_cnt 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:buf_cnt 0 nsec
  ...
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:fd_check 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:drain_buf 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:consume_buf 0 nsec
  serial_test_perf_buffer:FAIL:cpu_seen cpu 5 not seen
  #88 perf_buffer:FAIL
  Summary: 0/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED

If the offline cpu is from the middle of the possible set,
we get mismatch with possible and online cpu buffers.

The perf buffer test calls perf_buffer__consume_buffer for
all 'possible' cpus, but the library holds only 'online'
cpu buffers and perf_buffer__consume_buffer returns them
based on index.

Adding extra (online) index to keep track of online buffers,
we need the original (possible) index to trigger trace on
proper cpu.

Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
 .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_buffer.c  | 13 +++++++------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_buffer.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_buffer.c
index 877600392851..0b0cd045979b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_buffer.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/perf_buffer.c
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ int trigger_on_cpu(int cpu)
 
 void serial_test_perf_buffer(void)
 {
-	int err, on_len, nr_on_cpus = 0, nr_cpus, i;
+	int err, on_len, nr_on_cpus = 0, nr_cpus, i, j;
 	struct perf_buffer_opts pb_opts = {};
 	struct test_perf_buffer *skel;
 	cpu_set_t cpu_seen;
@@ -111,15 +111,15 @@ void serial_test_perf_buffer(void)
 		  "got %zu, expected %d\n", perf_buffer__buffer_cnt(pb), nr_on_cpus))
 		goto out_close;
 
-	for (i = 0; i < nr_cpus; i++) {
+	for (i = 0, j = 0; i < nr_cpus; i++) {
 		if (i >= on_len || !online[i])
 			continue;
 
-		fd = perf_buffer__buffer_fd(pb, i);
+		fd = perf_buffer__buffer_fd(pb, j);
 		CHECK(fd < 0 || last_fd == fd, "fd_check", "last fd %d == fd %d\n", last_fd, fd);
 		last_fd = fd;
 
-		err = perf_buffer__consume_buffer(pb, i);
+		err = perf_buffer__consume_buffer(pb, j);
 		if (CHECK(err, "drain_buf", "cpu %d, err %d\n", i, err))
 			goto out_close;
 
@@ -127,12 +127,13 @@ void serial_test_perf_buffer(void)
 		if (trigger_on_cpu(i))
 			goto out_close;
 
-		err = perf_buffer__consume_buffer(pb, i);
-		if (CHECK(err, "consume_buf", "cpu %d, err %d\n", i, err))
+		err = perf_buffer__consume_buffer(pb, j);
+		if (CHECK(err, "consume_buf", "cpu %d, err %d\n", j, err))
 			goto out_close;
 
 		if (CHECK(!CPU_ISSET(i, &cpu_seen), "cpu_seen", "cpu %d not seen\n", i))
 			goto out_close;
+		j++;
 	}
 
 out_free_pb:
-- 
2.31.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-10-21 11:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-21 11:41 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] selftests/bpf: Fixes for perf_buffer test Jiri Olsa
2021-10-21 11:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] selftests/bpf: Fix perf_buffer test on system with offline cpus Jiri Olsa
2021-10-21 11:41 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2021-10-21 11:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: Use nanosleep tracepoint in perf buffer test Jiri Olsa
2021-10-21 19:20 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] selftests/bpf: Fixes for perf_buffer test John Fastabend
2021-10-21 23:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-10-17 21:14 [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] selftests/bpf: Fix perf_buffer test on system with offline cpus Jiri Olsa
2021-10-17 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] selftests/bpf: Fix possible/online index mismatch in perf_buffer test Jiri Olsa

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=20211021114132.8196-3-jolsa@kernel.org \
    --to=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=kpsingh@chromium.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.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.