From: thinker.li@gmail.com
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev,
song@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, andrii@kernel.org
Cc: sinquersw@gmail.com, kuifeng@meta.com,
Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
Subject: [RFC bpf-next v3 11/11] selftests/bpf: test case for register_bpf_struct_ops().
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 08:59:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230920155923.151136-12-thinker.li@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230920155923.151136-1-thinker.li@gmail.com>
From: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
Register a new struct_ops type bpf_testmod_ops from the bpf_testmod module.
test_2 of bpf_testmod_ops will be called by the bpf_testmod module.
Signed-off-by: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
---
.../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++
.../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h | 5 ++
.../bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c | 43 +++++++++++++
.../selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c | 30 +++++++++
4 files changed, 141 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
index cefc5dd72573..3d208dbd23e4 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
/* Copyright (c) 2020 Facebook */
+#include <linux/bpf.h>
#include <linux/btf.h>
#include <linux/btf_ids.h>
#include <linux/error-injection.h>
@@ -517,11 +518,70 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test_static_unused_arg)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test_offset)
BTF_SET8_END(bpf_testmod_check_kfunc_ids)
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF_MODULES
+
+DEFINE_STRUCT_OPS_VALUE_TYPE(bpf_testmod_ops);
+
+static int bpf_testmod_ops_init(struct btf *btf)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static bool bpf_testmod_ops_is_valid_access(int off, int size,
+ enum bpf_access_type type,
+ const struct bpf_prog *prog,
+ struct bpf_insn_access_aux *info)
+{
+ return bpf_tracing_btf_ctx_access(off, size, type, prog, info);
+}
+
+static int bpf_testmod_ops_init_member(const struct btf_type *t,
+ const struct btf_member *member,
+ void *kdata, const void *udata)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
static const struct btf_kfunc_id_set bpf_testmod_kfunc_set = {
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
.set = &bpf_testmod_check_kfunc_ids,
};
+static const struct bpf_verifier_ops bpf_testmod_verifier_ops = {
+ .is_valid_access = bpf_testmod_ops_is_valid_access,
+};
+
+static int bpf_dummy_reg(void *kdata)
+{
+ struct bpf_testmod_ops *ops = kdata;
+ int r;
+
+ BTF_STRUCT_OPS_TYPE_EMIT(bpf_testmod_ops);
+ r = ops->test_2(4, 3);
+ printk(KERN_CRIT "bpf_dummy_reg: test_2 %d\n", r);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void bpf_dummy_unreg(void *kdata)
+{
+}
+
+struct bpf_struct_ops bpf_bpf_testmod_ops = {
+ .verifier_ops = &bpf_testmod_verifier_ops,
+ .init = bpf_testmod_ops_init,
+ .init_member = bpf_testmod_ops_init_member,
+ .reg = bpf_dummy_reg,
+ .unreg = bpf_dummy_unreg,
+ .name = "bpf_testmod_ops",
+};
+
+static struct bpf_struct_ops_mod bpf_testmod_struct_ops = {
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+ .st_ops = &bpf_bpf_testmod_ops,
+};
+
+#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF_MODULES */
+
extern int bpf_fentry_test1(int a);
static int bpf_testmod_init(void)
@@ -532,6 +592,9 @@ static int bpf_testmod_init(void)
ret = ret ?: register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS, &bpf_testmod_kfunc_set);
ret = ret ?: register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING, &bpf_testmod_kfunc_set);
ret = ret ?: register_btf_kfunc_id_set(BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL, &bpf_testmod_kfunc_set);
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF_MODULES
+ ret = ret ?: register_bpf_struct_ops(&bpf_testmod_struct_ops);
+#endif
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
if (bpf_fentry_test1(0) < 0)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h
index f32793efe095..ca5435751c79 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h
@@ -28,4 +28,9 @@ struct bpf_iter_testmod_seq {
int cnt;
};
+struct bpf_testmod_ops {
+ int (*test_1)(void);
+ int (*test_2)(int a, int b);
+};
+
#endif /* _BPF_TESTMOD_H */
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..8219a477b6d6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/* Copyright (c) 2023 Meta Platforms, Inc. and affiliates. */
+#include <test_progs.h>
+
+#include "struct_ops_module.skel.h"
+#include "testing_helpers.h"
+
+static void test_regular_load(void)
+{
+ struct struct_ops_module *skel;
+ struct bpf_link *link;
+ DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_object_open_opts, opts);
+ int err;
+
+ printf("test_regular_load\n");
+ skel = struct_ops_module__open_opts(&opts);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "struct_ops_module_open"))
+ return;
+ err = struct_ops_module__load(skel);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "struct_ops_module_load"))
+ return;
+
+ link = bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(skel->maps.testmod_1);
+ ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_test_mod_1");
+
+ ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_2_result, 7, "test_2_result");
+
+ bpf_link__destroy(link);
+
+ struct_ops_module__destroy(skel);
+
+ /* Wait for the map to be freed, or we may fail to unload
+ * bpf_testmod.
+ */
+ sleep(1);
+}
+
+void serial_test_struct_ops_module(void)
+{
+ if (test__start_subtest("regular_load"))
+ test_regular_load();
+}
+
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..cb305d04342f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/* Copyright (c) 2023 Meta Platforms, Inc. and affiliates. */
+#include <vmlinux.h>
+#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
+#include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h>
+#include "../bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h"
+
+char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
+
+int test_2_result = 0;
+
+SEC("struct_ops/test_1")
+int BPF_PROG(test_1)
+{
+ return 0xdeadbeef;
+}
+
+SEC("struct_ops/test_2")
+int BPF_PROG(test_2, int a, int b)
+{
+ test_2_result = a + b;
+ return a + b;
+}
+
+SEC(".struct_ops.link")
+struct bpf_testmod_ops testmod_1 = {
+ .test_1 = (void *)test_1,
+ .test_2 = (void *)test_2,
+};
+
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-20 16:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-20 15:59 [RFC bpf-next v3 00/11] Registrating struct_ops types from modules thinker.li
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 01/11] bpf: refactory struct_ops type initialization to a function thinker.li
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 02/11] bpf: add struct_ops_tab to btf thinker.li
2023-09-25 21:10 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 21:45 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 03/11] bpf: add register and unregister functions for struct_ops thinker.li
2023-09-25 23:07 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 23:13 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-25 23:31 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 0:19 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 04/11] bpf: attach a module BTF to a bpf_struct_ops thinker.li
2023-09-25 22:57 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 23:25 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 05/11] bpf: hold module for bpf_struct_ops_map thinker.li
2023-09-25 23:23 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 23:42 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 06/11] bpf: validate value_type thinker.li
2023-09-26 1:03 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-27 20:27 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 07/11] bpf, net: switch to storing struct_ops in btf thinker.li
2023-09-26 0:02 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 0:18 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 08/11] bpf: pass attached BTF to find correct type info of struct_ops progs thinker.li
2023-09-25 22:58 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-09-25 23:50 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-26 0:24 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 0:58 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 09/11] libbpf: Find correct module BTFs for struct_ops maps and progs thinker.li
2023-09-25 23:09 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-09-26 0:12 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 10/11] bpf: export btf_ctx_access to modules thinker.li
2023-09-20 15:59 ` thinker.li [this message]
2023-09-26 1:19 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 11/11] selftests/bpf: test case for register_bpf_struct_ops() Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 1:33 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 00/11] Registrating struct_ops types from modules Martin KaFai Lau
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=20230920155923.151136-12-thinker.li@gmail.com \
--to=thinker.li@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kuifeng@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sinquersw@gmail.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox