Re: [RFC PATCH] bpf: s390: add JIT support for multi-function programs

[Yauheni Kaliuta <yauheni.kaliuta@redhat.com>]

Hi, Ilya!

>>>>> On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 15:46:43 +0200, Ilya Leoshkevich  wrote:

 >> Am 27.08.2019 um 15:21 schrieb Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>:
 >> 
 >>> Am 26.08.2019 um 20:20 schrieb Yauheni Kaliuta <yauheni.kaliuta@redhat.com>:
 >>> 
 >>> test_verifier (5.3-rc6):
 >>> 
 >>> without patch:
 >>> Summary: 1501 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 47 FAILED
 >>> 
 >>> with patch:
 >>> Summary: 1540 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 8 FAILED
 >> 
 >> Are you per chance running with a testsuite patch like this one?
 >> 
 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
 >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
 >> @@ -846,7 +846,7 @@ static int do_prog_test_run(int fd_prog, bool unpriv, uint32_t expected_val,
 >> tmp, &size_tmp, &retval, NULL);
 >> if (unpriv)
 >> set_admin(false);
 >> -	if (err && errno != 524/*ENOTSUPP*/ && errno != EPERM) {
 >> +	if (err && errno != EPERM) {
 >> printf("Unexpected bpf_prog_test_run error ");
 >> return err;
 >> }
 >> 
 >> Without it, all the failures appear to be masked for me.

 > Hmm, I'm sorry, I thought about it a bit more, and the patch I
 > posted above doesn't make any sense, because the failures you
 > fixed are during load, and not run time.

 > Now I think you are using CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON for your
 > testing, is that right? If yes, it would be nice to mention

Right.

 > this in the commit message.

Sure. Should I post non-RFC v2 or wait for some more comments?

-- 
WBR,
Yauheni Kaliuta