Re: [PATCH v2 bpf 2/6] selftest: bpf: Add test for bpf_tcp_sock() and RAW socket.

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Newly added code uses manual error checks instead of the mandated modern ASSERT_* macros.
--

commit 1a574056fa08ab8c66dcd9b6ee5f0739ff6721b7
Author: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@google.com>

selftest: bpf: Add test for bpf_tcp_sock() and RAW socket.

This commit adds a test to cover bpf_tcp_sock() for wrong socket types,
specifically tricking it with IPPROTO_TCP on an AF_INET RAW socket. It
also fixes a missing free() in the test.

> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockopt_sk.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockopt_sk.c
> index 53637431ec5d..5fd33ad2eaaf 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockopt_sk.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockopt_sk.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -211,6 +211,22 @@ static int getsetsockopt(void)
>  	}
>  	ASSERT_EQ(optlen, 8, "Unexpected NETLINK_LIST_MEMBERSHIPS value");
>  
> +	/* Trick bpf_tcp_sock() with IPPROTO_TCP */
> +	close(fd);
> +	fd = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_RAW, IPPROTO_TCP);
> +	if (fd < 0) {
> +		log_err("Failed to create RAW socket");
> +		goto err;
> +	}

This isn't a bug, but should this new code use the modern ASSERT_OK_FD()
macro instead of manual fd checks and log_err()?

> +
> +	optlen = 20;
> +	errno = 0;
> +	err = setsockopt(fd, SOL_TCP, TCP_SAVED_SYN, &buf, optlen);
> +	if (!err) {
> +		log_err("Unexpected setsockopt(TCP_SAVED_SYN)");
> +		goto err;
> +	}

Could we use ASSERT_ERR() for this error check as well?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260504210610.180150-1-kuniyu@google.com?part=2