From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>
To: Feng Yang <yangfeng59949@163.com>
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com,
hengqi.chen@gmail.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add test for attaching kprobe with long event names
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 13:47:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z_z161cpsaR2uQm3@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250414093402.384872-4-yangfeng59949@163.com>
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 05:34:02PM +0800, Feng Yang wrote:
> From: Feng Yang <yangfeng@kylinos.cn>
>
> This test verifies that attaching kprobe/kretprobe with long event names
> does not trigger EINVAL errors.
>
> Signed-off-by: Feng Yang <yangfeng@kylinos.cn>
> ---
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++
> .../selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod.c | 5 +++
> .../bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod_kfunc.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 42 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c
> index 9b7f36f39c32..633b5eb4379b 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/attach_probe.c
> @@ -168,6 +168,39 @@ static void test_attach_uprobe_long_event_name(void)
> test_attach_probe_manual__destroy(skel);
> }
>
> +/* attach kprobe/kretprobe long event name testings */
> +static void test_attach_kprobe_long_event_name(void)
> +{
> + DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_kprobe_opts, kprobe_opts);
> + struct bpf_link *kprobe_link, *kretprobe_link;
> + struct test_attach_probe_manual *skel;
> +
> + skel = test_attach_probe_manual__open_and_load();
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "skel_kprobe_manual_open_and_load"))
> + return;
> +
> + /* manual-attach kprobe/kretprobe */
> + kprobe_opts.attach_mode = PROBE_ATTACH_MODE_LEGACY;
> + kprobe_opts.retprobe = false;
> + kprobe_link = bpf_program__attach_kprobe_opts(skel->progs.handle_kprobe,
> + "bpf_kfunc_looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong_name",
> + &kprobe_opts);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(kprobe_link, "attach_kprobe_long_event_name"))
> + goto cleanup;
> + skel->links.handle_kprobe = kprobe_link;
> +
> + kprobe_opts.retprobe = true;
> + kretprobe_link = bpf_program__attach_kprobe_opts(skel->progs.handle_kretprobe,
> + "bpf_kfunc_looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong_name",
> + &kprobe_opts);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(kretprobe_link, "attach_kretprobe_long_event_name"))
> + goto cleanup;
> + skel->links.handle_kretprobe = kretprobe_link;
> +
> +cleanup:
> + test_attach_probe_manual__destroy(skel);
> +}
> +
> static void test_attach_probe_auto(struct test_attach_probe *skel)
> {
> struct bpf_link *uprobe_err_link;
> @@ -371,6 +404,8 @@ void test_attach_probe(void)
>
> if (test__start_subtest("uprobe-long_name"))
> test_attach_uprobe_long_event_name();
> + if (test__start_subtest("kprobe-long_name"))
> + test_attach_kprobe_long_event_name();
>
> cleanup:
> test_attach_probe__destroy(skel);
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod.c
> index f38eaf0d35ef..439f6c2b2456 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod.c
> @@ -1053,6 +1053,10 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_kfunc_st_ops_inc10(struct st_ops_args *args)
> return args->a;
> }
>
> +__bpf_kfunc void bpf_kfunc_looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong_name(void)
> +{
> +}
does it need to be a kfunc? IIUC it just needs to be a normal kernel/module function
jirka
> +
> BTF_KFUNCS_START(bpf_testmod_check_kfunc_ids)
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_testmod_test_mod_kfunc)
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test1)
> @@ -1093,6 +1097,7 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_st_ops_test_prologue, KF_TRUSTED_ARGS | KF_SLEEPABL
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_st_ops_test_epilogue, KF_TRUSTED_ARGS | KF_SLEEPABLE)
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_st_ops_test_pro_epilogue, KF_TRUSTED_ARGS | KF_SLEEPABLE)
> BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_st_ops_inc10, KF_TRUSTED_ARGS)
> +BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong_name)
> BTF_KFUNCS_END(bpf_testmod_check_kfunc_ids)
>
> static int bpf_testmod_ops_init(struct btf *btf)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod_kfunc.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod_kfunc.h
> index b58817938deb..e5b833140418 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod_kfunc.h
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmods/bpf_testmod_kfunc.h
> @@ -159,4 +159,6 @@ void bpf_kfunc_trusted_task_test(struct task_struct *ptr) __ksym;
> void bpf_kfunc_trusted_num_test(int *ptr) __ksym;
> void bpf_kfunc_rcu_task_test(struct task_struct *ptr) __ksym;
>
> +void bpf_kfunc_looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong_name(void) __ksym;
> +
> #endif /* _BPF_TESTMOD_KFUNC_H */
> --
> 2.43.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-14 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-14 9:33 [PATCH v3 bpf-next 0/3] libbpf: Fix event name too long error and add tests Feng Yang
2025-04-14 9:34 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 1/3] libbpf: Fix event name too long error Feng Yang
2025-04-14 11:43 ` Jiri Olsa
2025-04-15 2:01 ` Feng Yang
2025-04-15 7:20 ` Jiri Olsa
2025-04-14 9:34 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 2/3] selftests/bpf: Add test for attaching uprobe with long event names Feng Yang
2025-04-14 9:34 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add test for attaching kprobe " Feng Yang
2025-04-14 11:47 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2025-04-15 2:52 ` Feng Yang
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=Z_z161cpsaR2uQm3@krava \
--to=olsajiri@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=hengqi.chen@gmail.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yangfeng59949@163.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.