Re: [RFC bpf-next 3/9] selftests/bpf: add selftests for new insn_set map

[Anton Protopopov <a.s.protopopov@gmail.com>]

On 25/06/18 04:04AM, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> On Sun, 2025-06-15 at 08:59 +0000, Anton Protopopov wrote:
> > Tests are split in two parts.
> > 
> > The `bpf_insn_set_ops` test checks that the map is managed properly:
> > 
> >   * Incorrect instruction indexes are rejected
> >   * Non-sorted and non-unique indexes are rejected
> >   * Unfrozen maps are not accepted
> >   * Two programs can't use the same map
> >   * BPF progs can't operate the map
> > 
> > The `bpf_insn_set_reloc` part validates, as best as it can do it from user
> > space, that instructions are relocated properly:
> > 
> >   * no relocations => map is the same
> >   * expected relocations when instructions are added
> >   * expected relocations when instructions are deleted
> >   * expected relocations when multiple functions are present
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Anton Protopopov <a.s.protopopov@gmail.com>
> > ---
> 
> Nit: term "relocation" is ambiguous, in BPF context first thing that
>      comes to mind are ELF relocations that allow CO-RE to work.

Thanks, agree. I will try to find other words for the desriptions

> [...]
> 
>