From: thinker.li@gmail.com
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev,
song@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, andrii@kernel.org
Cc: sinquersw@gmail.com, kuifeng@meta.com,
Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
Subject: [RFC bpf-next v3 11/11] selftests/bpf: test case for register_bpf_struct_ops().
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 08:59:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230920155923.151136-12-thinker.li@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230920155923.151136-1-thinker.li@gmail.com>
From: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
Register a new struct_ops type bpf_testmod_ops from the bpf_testmod module.
test_2 of bpf_testmod_ops will be called by the bpf_testmod module.
Signed-off-by: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
---
.../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++
.../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h | 5 ++
.../bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c | 43 +++++++++++++
.../selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c | 30 +++++++++
4 files changed, 141 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
index cefc5dd72573..3d208dbd23e4 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
/* Copyright (c) 2020 Facebook */
+#include <linux/bpf.h>
#include <linux/btf.h>
#include <linux/btf_ids.h>
#include <linux/error-injection.h>
@@ -517,11 +518,70 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test_static_unused_arg)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test_offset)
BTF_SET8_END(bpf_testmod_check_kfunc_ids)
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF_MODULES
+
+DEFINE_STRUCT_OPS_VALUE_TYPE(bpf_testmod_ops);
+
+static int bpf_testmod_ops_init(struct btf *btf)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static bool bpf_testmod_ops_is_valid_access(int off, int size,
+ enum bpf_access_type type,
+ const struct bpf_prog *prog,
+ struct bpf_insn_access_aux *info)
+{
+ return bpf_tracing_btf_ctx_access(off, size, type, prog, info);
+}
+
+static int bpf_testmod_ops_init_member(const struct btf_type *t,
+ const struct btf_member *member,
+ void *kdata, const void *udata)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
static const struct btf_kfunc_id_set bpf_testmod_kfunc_set = {
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
.set = &bpf_testmod_check_kfunc_ids,
};
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops bpf_testmod_verifier_ops = {
+ .is_valid_access = bpf_testmod_ops_is_valid_access,
+};
+
+static int bpf_dummy_reg(void *kdata)
+{
+ struct bpf_testmod_ops *ops = kdata;
+ int r;
+
+ BTF_STRUCT_OPS_TYPE_EMIT(bpf_testmod_ops);
+ r = ops->test_2(4, 3);
+ printk(KERN_CRIT "bpf_dummy_reg: test_2 %d\n", r);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void bpf_dummy_unreg(void *kdata)
+{
+}
+
+struct bpf_struct_ops bpf_bpf_testmod_ops = {
+ .verifier_ops = &bpf_testmod_verifier_ops,
+ .init = bpf_testmod_ops_init,
+ .init_member = bpf_testmod_ops_init_member,
+ .reg = bpf_dummy_reg,
+ .unreg = bpf_dummy_unreg,
+ .name = "bpf_testmod_ops",
+};
+
+static struct bpf_struct_ops_mod bpf_testmod_struct_ops = {
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+ .st_ops = &bpf_bpf_testmod_ops,
+};
+
+#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF_MODULES */
+
extern int bpf_fentry_test1(int a);
static int bpf_testmod_init(void)
@@ -532,6 +592,9 @@ static int bpf_testmod_init(void)
ret = ret ?: register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS, &bpf_testmod_kfunc_set);
ret = ret ?: register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING, &bpf_testmod_kfunc_set);
ret = ret ?: register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL, &bpf_testmod_kfunc_set);
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF_MODULES
+ ret = ret ?: register_bpf_struct_ops(&bpf_testmod_struct_ops);
+#endif
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
if (bpf_fentry_test1(0) < 0)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h
index f32793efe095..ca5435751c79 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h
@@ -28,4 +28,9 @@ struct bpf_iter_testmod_seq {
int cnt;
};
+struct bpf_testmod_ops {
+ int (*test_1)(void);
+ int (*test_2)(int a, int b);
+};
+
#endif /* _BPF_TESTMOD_H */
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..8219a477b6d6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/* Copyright (c) 2023 Meta Platforms, Inc. and affiliates. */
+#include <test_progs.h>
+
+#include "struct_ops_module.skel.h"
+#include "testing_helpers.h"
+
+static void test_regular_load(void)
+{
+ struct struct_ops_module *skel;
+ struct bpf_link *link;
+ DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_object_open_opts, opts);
+ int err;
+
+ printf("test_regular_load\n");
+ skel = struct_ops_module__open_opts(&opts);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "struct_ops_module_open"))
+ return;
+ err = struct_ops_module__load(skel);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "struct_ops_module_load"))
+ return;
+
+ link = bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(skel->maps.testmod_1);
+ ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_test_mod_1");
+
+ ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_2_result, 7, "test_2_result");
+
+ bpf_link__destroy(link);
+
+ struct_ops_module__destroy(skel);
+
+ /* Wait for the map to be freed, or we may fail to unload
+ * bpf_testmod.
+ */
+ sleep(1);
+}
+
+void serial_test_struct_ops_module(void)
+{
+ if (test__start_subtest("regular_load"))
+ test_regular_load();
+}
+
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..cb305d04342f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/* Copyright (c) 2023 Meta Platforms, Inc. and affiliates. */
+#include <vmlinux.h>
+#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
+#include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h>
+#include "../bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h"
+
+char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
+
+int test_2_result = 0;
+
+SEC("struct_ops/test_1")
+int BPF_PROG(test_1)
+{
+ return 0xdeadbeef;
+}
+
+SEC("struct_ops/test_2")
+int BPF_PROG(test_2, int a, int b)
+{
+ test_2_result = a + b;
+ return a + b;
+}
+
+SEC(".struct_ops.link")
+struct bpf_testmod_ops testmod_1 = {
+ .test_1 = (void *)test_1,
+ .test_2 = (void *)test_2,
+};
+
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-20 16:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-20 15:59 [RFC bpf-next v3 00/11] Registrating struct_ops types from modules thinker.li
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 01/11] bpf: refactory struct_ops type initialization to a function thinker.li
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 02/11] bpf: add struct_ops_tab to btf thinker.li
2023-09-25 21:10 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 21:45 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 03/11] bpf: add register and unregister functions for struct_ops thinker.li
2023-09-25 23:07 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 23:13 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-25 23:31 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 0:19 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 04/11] bpf: attach a module BTF to a bpf_struct_ops thinker.li
2023-09-25 22:57 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 23:25 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 05/11] bpf: hold module for bpf_struct_ops_map thinker.li
2023-09-25 23:23 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 23:42 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 06/11] bpf: validate value_type thinker.li
2023-09-26 1:03 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-27 20:27 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 07/11] bpf, net: switch to storing struct_ops in btf thinker.li
2023-09-20 23:45 ` kernel test robot
2023-09-24 3:23 ` kernel test robot
2023-09-25 8:30 ` kernel test robot
2023-09-26 0:02 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 0:18 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 08/11] bpf: pass attached BTF to find correct type info of struct_ops progs thinker.li
2023-09-25 22:58 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-09-25 23:50 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-26 0:24 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 0:58 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 09/11] libbpf: Find correct module BTFs for struct_ops maps and progs thinker.li
2023-09-25 23:09 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-09-26 0:12 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 10/11] bpf: export btf_ctx_access to modules thinker.li
2023-09-20 15:59 ` thinker.li [this message]
2023-09-26 1:19 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 11/11] selftests/bpf: test case for register_bpf_struct_ops() Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 1:33 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 00/11] Registrating struct_ops types from modules Martin KaFai Lau
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=20230920155923.151136-12-thinker.li@gmail.com \
--to=thinker.li@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kuifeng@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sinquersw@gmail.com \
--cc=song@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 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.