Re: [PATCHv3 bpf-next 5/7] selftests/bpf: Add uprobe_multi path_fd test

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] The selftest uses a non-existent structure member `opts.uprobe_multi.path_fd` and an undefined macro `BPF_F_UPROBE_MULTI_PATH_FD`, which will cause a build failure.
--

commit 7f1afda8cdc452975b891e8563b1e8e01d191c3a
Author: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

selftests/bpf: Add uprobe_multi path_fd test

This patch adds a uprobe_multi link API selftest. The test opens
/proc/self/exe and passes the descriptor through opts.uprobe_multi.path_fd
using the BPF_F_UPROBE_MULTI_PATH_FD flag.

> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_multi_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_multi_test.c
> index 56cbea280fbd2..ffcf3c92f0474 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_multi_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_multi_test.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -757,6 +758,65 @@ static void test_link_api(void)
>  	__test_link_api(&child);
>  }
>  
> +static void test_link_api_path_fd(void)
> +{
> +	LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_link_create_opts, opts);
> +	const char *resolve_path = "/proc/self/exe";
> +	int prog_fd, link_fd = -1, path_fd = -1;
> +	struct uprobe_multi *skel = NULL;

[ ... ]

> +	path_fd = open(resolve_path, O_RDONLY);
> +	if (!ASSERT_GE(path_fd, 0, "path_fd"))
> +		goto cleanup;
> +
> +	opts.uprobe_multi.path_fd = path_fd;
> +	opts.uprobe_multi.offsets = offsets;
> +	opts.uprobe_multi.cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(syms);
> +	opts.uprobe_multi.flags = BPF_F_UPROBE_MULTI_PATH_FD;

[Severity: Low]
Does the uprobe_multi structure in bpf_link_create_opts actually have a
path_fd member? It appears this code references an undefined struct member
along with an undefined macro BPF_F_UPROBE_MULTI_PATH_FD. Will this cause
a build failure?

> +
> +	skel = uprobe_multi__open_and_load();

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260611114230.950379-6-jolsa@kernel.org?part=1