From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
To: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, <ast@kernel.org>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
<martin.lau@kernel.org>
Cc: <andrii@kernel.org>, <kernel-team@meta.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] selftests/bpf: improve percpu_alloc test robustness
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 15:37:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231011223728.3188086-2-andrii@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231011223728.3188086-1-andrii@kernel.org>
Make these non-serial tests filter BPF programs by intended PID of
a test runner process. This makes it isolated from other parallel tests
that might interfere accidentally.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c | 3 +++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_array.c | 7 +++++++
.../selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_cgrp_local_storage.c | 4 ++++
3 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c
index 9541e9b3a034..343da65864d6 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ static void test_array(void)
bpf_program__set_autoload(skel->progs.test_array_map_3, true);
bpf_program__set_autoload(skel->progs.test_array_map_4, true);
+ skel->bss->my_pid = getpid();
skel->rodata->nr_cpus = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
err = percpu_alloc_array__load(skel);
@@ -51,6 +52,7 @@ static void test_array_sleepable(void)
bpf_program__set_autoload(skel->progs.test_array_map_10, true);
+ skel->bss->my_pid = getpid();
skel->rodata->nr_cpus = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
err = percpu_alloc_array__load(skel);
@@ -85,6 +87,7 @@ static void test_cgrp_local_storage(void)
if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "percpu_alloc_cgrp_local_storage__open"))
goto close_fd;
+ skel->bss->my_pid = getpid();
skel->rodata->nr_cpus = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
err = percpu_alloc_cgrp_local_storage__load(skel);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_array.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_array.c
index bbc45346e006..37c2d2608ec0 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_array.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_array.c
@@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ int BPF_PROG(test_array_map_2)
}
int cpu0_field_d, sum_field_c;
+int my_pid;
/* Summarize percpu data */
SEC("?fentry/bpf_fentry_test3")
@@ -81,6 +82,9 @@ int BPF_PROG(test_array_map_3)
struct val_t *v;
struct elem *e;
+ if ((bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32) != my_pid)
+ return 0;
+
e = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&array, &index);
if (!e)
return 0;
@@ -130,6 +134,9 @@ int BPF_PROG(test_array_map_10)
struct val_t *v;
struct elem *e;
+ if ((bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32) != my_pid)
+ return 0;
+
e = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&array, &index);
if (!e)
return 0;
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_cgrp_local_storage.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_cgrp_local_storage.c
index 1c36a241852c..a2acf9aa6c24 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_cgrp_local_storage.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/percpu_alloc_cgrp_local_storage.c
@@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ int BPF_PROG(test_cgrp_local_storage_2)
}
int cpu0_field_d, sum_field_c;
+int my_pid;
/* Summarize percpu data collection */
SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test3")
@@ -81,6 +82,9 @@ int BPF_PROG(test_cgrp_local_storage_3)
struct elem *e;
int i;
+ if ((bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32) != my_pid)
+ return 0;
+
task = bpf_get_current_task_btf();
e = bpf_cgrp_storage_get(&cgrp, task->cgroups->dfl_cgrp, 0, 0);
if (!e)
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-11 22:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-11 22:37 [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] BPF verifier log improvements Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-11 22:37 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2023-10-12 6:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] selftests/bpf: improve percpu_alloc test robustness Yafang Shao
2023-10-12 16:37 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-11 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] selftests/bpf: improve missed_kprobe_recursion " Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-12 13:22 ` Jiri Olsa
2023-10-11 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/5] selftests/bpf: make align selftests more robust Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-11 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] bpf: disambiguate SCALAR register state output in verifier logs Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-12 5:33 ` John Fastabend
2023-10-12 16:22 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-12 16:59 ` John Fastabend
2023-10-12 17:45 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-11 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/5] bpf: ensure proper register state printing for cond jumps Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-12 5:40 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] BPF verifier log improvements John Fastabend
2023-10-12 15:00 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-16 12:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20231011223728.3188086-2-andrii@kernel.org \
--to=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@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