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 05/15] selftests/bpf: utility functions to capture libbpf log in test_progs
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2024 03:19:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240302011920.15302-6-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240302011920.15302-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>
Several test_progs tests already capture libbpf log in order to check
for some expected output, e.g bpf_tcp_ca.c, kfunc_dynptr_param.c,
log_buf.c and a few others.
This commit provides a, hopefully, simple API to capture libbpf log
w/o necessity to define new print callback in each test:
/* Creates a global memstream capturing all output passed to
* libbpf_print_fn.
* Returns 0 on success, negative value on failure.
* On failure the description is printed using PRINT_FAIL and
* current test case is marked as fail.
*/
int start_libbpf_log_capture(void)
/* Destroys global memstream created by start_libbpf_log_capture().
* Returns a pointer to captured data which has to be freed.
* Returned buffer is null terminated.
*/
char *stop_libbpf_log_capture(void)
The intended usage is as follows:
if (start_libbpf_log_capture())
return;
use_libbpf();
char *log = stop_libbpf_log_capture();
ASSERT_HAS_SUBSTR(log, "... expected ...", "expected some message");
free(log);
As a safety measure, free(start_libbpf_log_capture()) is invoked in the
epilogue of the test_progs.c:run_one_test().
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h | 3 ++
2 files changed, 60 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
index 808550986f30..698c7387b310 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
@@ -683,9 +683,65 @@ static const struct argp_option opts[] = {
{},
};
+static FILE *libbpf_capture_stream;
+
+static struct {
+ char *buf;
+ size_t buf_sz;
+} libbpf_output_capture;
+
+/* Creates a global memstream capturing all output passed to libbpf_print_fn.
+ * Returns 0 on success, negative value on failure.
+ * On failure the description is printed using PRINT_FAIL and
+ * current test case is marked as fail.
+ */
+int start_libbpf_log_capture(void)
+{
+ if (libbpf_capture_stream) {
+ PRINT_FAIL("%s: libbpf_capture_stream != NULL\n", __func__);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ libbpf_capture_stream = open_memstream(&libbpf_output_capture.buf,
+ &libbpf_output_capture.buf_sz);
+ if (!libbpf_capture_stream) {
+ PRINT_FAIL("%s: open_memstream failed errno=%d\n", __func__, errno);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+/* Destroys global memstream created by start_libbpf_log_capture().
+ * Returns a pointer to captured data which has to be freed.
+ * Returned buffer is null terminated.
+ */
+char *stop_libbpf_log_capture(void)
+{
+ char *buf;
+
+ if (!libbpf_capture_stream)
+ return NULL;
+
+ fputc(0, libbpf_capture_stream);
+ fclose(libbpf_capture_stream);
+ libbpf_capture_stream = NULL;
+ /* get 'buf' after fclose(), see open_memstream() documentation */
+ buf = libbpf_output_capture.buf;
+ bzero(&libbpf_output_capture, sizeof(libbpf_output_capture));
+ return buf;
+}
+
static int libbpf_print_fn(enum libbpf_print_level level,
const char *format, va_list args)
{
+ if (libbpf_capture_stream) {
+ va_list args2;
+
+ va_copy(args2, args);
+ vfprintf(libbpf_capture_stream, format, args2);
+ }
+
if (env.verbosity < VERBOSE_VERY && level == LIBBPF_DEBUG)
return 0;
vfprintf(stdout, format, args);
@@ -1081,6 +1137,7 @@ static void run_one_test(int test_num)
cleanup_cgroup_environment();
stdio_restore();
+ free(stop_libbpf_log_capture());
dump_test_log(test, state, false, false, NULL);
}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h
index 80df51244886..0ba5a20b19ba 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h
@@ -397,6 +397,9 @@ int test__join_cgroup(const char *path);
system(cmd); \
})
+int start_libbpf_log_capture(void);
+char *stop_libbpf_log_capture(void);
+
static inline __u64 ptr_to_u64(const void *ptr)
{
return (__u64) (unsigned long) ptr;
--
2.43.0
next prev 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 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 04/15] selftests/bpf: test struct_ops map definition with type suffix Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02 1:19 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
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=20240302011920.15302-6-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.