All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev,
	kernel-team@fb.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev, void@manifault.com,
	sinquersw@gmail.com, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 04/15] selftests/bpf: test struct_ops map definition with type suffix
Date: Sat,  2 Mar 2024 03:19:09 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240302011920.15302-5-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240302011920.15302-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>

Extend struct_ops_module test case to check if it is possible to use
'___' suffixes for struct_ops type specification.

Acked-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c   |  1 +
 .../bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c   | 33 ++++++++++++++-----
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c   | 21 +++++++++++-
 3 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
index 098ddd067224..b9ff88e3d463 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
@@ -564,6 +564,7 @@ static int bpf_dummy_reg(void *kdata)
 {
 	struct bpf_testmod_ops *ops = kdata;
 
+	ops->test_1();
 	/* Some test cases (ex. struct_ops_maybe_null) may not have test_2
 	 * initialized, so we need to check for NULL.
 	 */
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
index 7d6facf46ebb..ee5372c7f2c7 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
@@ -30,11 +30,29 @@ static void check_map_info(struct bpf_map_info *info)
 	close(fd);
 }
 
+static int attach_ops_and_check(struct struct_ops_module *skel,
+				struct bpf_map *map,
+				int expected_test_2_result)
+{
+	struct bpf_link *link;
+
+	link = bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(map);
+	ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_test_mod_1");
+	if (!link)
+		return -1;
+
+	/* test_{1,2}() would be called from bpf_dummy_reg() in bpf_testmod.c */
+	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_1_result, 0xdeadbeef, "test_1_result");
+	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_2_result, expected_test_2_result, "test_2_result");
+
+	bpf_link__destroy(link);
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static void test_struct_ops_load(void)
 {
 	struct struct_ops_module *skel;
 	struct bpf_map_info info = {};
-	struct bpf_link *link;
 	int err;
 	u32 len;
 
@@ -59,20 +77,17 @@ static void test_struct_ops_load(void)
 	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map_get_info_by_fd"))
 		goto cleanup;
 
-	link = bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(skel->maps.testmod_1);
-	ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_test_mod_1");
-
+	check_map_info(&info);
 	/* test_3() will be called from bpf_dummy_reg() in bpf_testmod.c
 	 *
 	 * In bpf_testmod.c it will pass 4 and 13 (the value of data) to
 	 * .test_2.  So, the value of test_2_result should be 20 (4 + 13 +
 	 * 3).
 	 */
-	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_2_result, 20, "check_shadow_variables");
-
-	bpf_link__destroy(link);
-
-	check_map_info(&info);
+	if (!attach_ops_and_check(skel, skel->maps.testmod_1, 20))
+		goto cleanup;
+	if (!attach_ops_and_check(skel, skel->maps.testmod_2, 12))
+		goto cleanup;
 
 cleanup:
 	struct_ops_module__destroy(skel);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c
index 25952fa09348..026cabfa7f1f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c
@@ -7,12 +7,14 @@
 
 char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
 
+int test_1_result = 0;
 int test_2_result = 0;
 
 SEC("struct_ops/test_1")
 int BPF_PROG(test_1)
 {
-	return 0xdeadbeef;
+	test_1_result = 0xdeadbeef;
+	return 0;
 }
 
 SEC("struct_ops/test_2")
@@ -35,3 +37,20 @@ struct bpf_testmod_ops testmod_1 = {
 	.data = 0x1,
 };
 
+SEC("struct_ops/test_2")
+void BPF_PROG(test_2_v2, int a, int b)
+{
+	test_2_result = a * b;
+}
+
+struct bpf_testmod_ops___v2 {
+	int (*test_1)(void);
+	void (*test_2)(int a, int b);
+	int (*test_maybe_null)(int dummy, struct task_struct *task);
+};
+
+SEC(".struct_ops.link")
+struct bpf_testmod_ops___v2 testmod_2 = {
+	.test_1 = (void *)test_1,
+	.test_2 = (void *)test_2_v2,
+};
-- 
2.43.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-03-02  1:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-02  1:19 [PATCH bpf-next v2 00/15] libbpf: type suffixes and autocreate flag for struct_ops maps Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 01/15] libbpf: allow version suffixes (___smth) for struct_ops types Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 02/15] libbpf: tie struct_ops programs to kernel BTF ids, not to local ids Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 03/15] libbpf: honor autocreate flag for struct_ops maps Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 05/15] selftests/bpf: utility functions to capture libbpf log in test_progs Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 06/15] selftests/bpf: bad_struct_ops test Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/15] selftests/bpf: test autocreate behavior for struct_ops maps Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 08/15] libbpf: sync progs autoload with maps autocreate " Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-04 19:13   ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 09/15] selftests/bpf: verify struct_ops autoload/autocreate sync Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 10/15] libbpf: replace elf_state->st_ops_* fields with SEC_ST_OPS sec_type Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 11/15] libbpf: struct_ops in SEC("?.struct_ops") and SEC("?.struct_ops.link") Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 12/15] libbpf: rewrite btf datasec names starting from '?' Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 13/15] selftests/bpf: test case for SEC("?.struct_ops") Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 14/15] bpf: allow '?' at the beginning of DATASEC names Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 15/15] selftests/bpf: test cases for '?' in BTF names Eduard Zingerman

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=20240302011920.15302-5-eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=sinquersw@gmail.com \
    --cc=void@manifault.com \
    --cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    /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.