Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester

BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
	martin.lau@kernel.org
Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 15:08:05 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <202310191409.pIIb2buD-lkp@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231019042405.2971130-8-andrii@kernel.org>

Hi Andrii,

kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:

[auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]

url:    https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Andrii-Nakryiko/bpf-improve-JEQ-JNE-branch-taken-logic/20231019-122550
base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
patch link:    https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231019042405.2971130-8-andrii%40kernel.org
patch subject: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester
reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231019/202310191409.pIIb2buD-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)

If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202310191409.pIIb2buD-lkp@intel.com/

# many are suggestions rather than must-fix

WARNING:NEW_TYPEDEFS: do not add new typedefs
#169: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:21:
+typedef unsigned long long ___u64;

WARNING:NEW_TYPEDEFS: do not add new typedefs
#170: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:22:
+typedef unsigned int ___u32;

WARNING:NEW_TYPEDEFS: do not add new typedefs
#171: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:23:
+typedef long long ___s64;

WARNING:NEW_TYPEDEFS: do not add new typedefs
#172: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:24:
+typedef int ___s32;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#215: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:67:
+	case U64: return (u64)x < (u64)y ? (u64)x : (u64)y;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#216: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:68:
+	case U32: return (u32)x < (u32)y ? (u32)x : (u32)y;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#217: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:69:
+	case S64: return (s64)x < (s64)y ? (s64)x : (s64)y;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#218: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:70:
+	case S32: return (s32)x < (s32)y ? (s32)x : (s32)y;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#219: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:71:
+	default: printf("min_t!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'min_t', this function's name, in a string
#219: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:71:
+	default: printf("min_t!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#226: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:78:
+	case U64: return (u64)x > (u64)y ? (u64)x : (u64)y;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#227: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:79:
+	case U32: return (u32)x > (u32)y ? (u32)x : (u32)y;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#228: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:80:
+	case S64: return (s64)x > (s64)y ? (s64)x : (s64)y;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#229: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:81:
+	case S32: return (s32)x > (s32)y ? (u32)(s32)x : (u32)(s32)y;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#230: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:82:
+	default: printf("max_t!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'max_t', this function's name, in a string
#230: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:82:
+	default: printf("max_t!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#241: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:93:
+	default: printf("t_str!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 't_str', this function's name, in a string
#241: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:93:
+	default: printf("t_str!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#252: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:104:
+	default: printf("t_is_32!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 't_is_32', this function's name, in a string
#252: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:104:
+	default: printf("t_is_32!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#263: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:115:
+	default: printf("t_signed!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 't_signed', this function's name, in a string
#263: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:115:
+	default: printf("t_signed!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#274: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:126:
+	default: printf("t_unsigned!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 't_unsigned', this function's name, in a string
#274: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:126:
+	default: printf("t_unsigned!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#285: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:137:
+	default: printf("num_is_small!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'num_is_small', this function's name, in a string
#285: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:137:
+	default: printf("num_is_small!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#299: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:151:
+		default: printf("snprintf_num!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'snprintf_num', this function's name, in a string
#299: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:151:
+		default: printf("snprintf_num!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#339: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:191:
+		default: printf("snprintf_num!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'snprintf_num', this function's name, in a string
#339: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:191:
+		default: printf("snprintf_num!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#386: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:238:
+	default: printf("unkn_subreg!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'unkn_subreg', this function's name, in a string
#386: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:238:
+	default: printf("unkn_subreg!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#397: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:249:
+	default: printf("range!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range', this function's name, in a string
#397: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:249:
+	default: printf("range!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#454: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:306:
+	default: printf("range_cast_u64!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast_u64', this function's name, in a string
#454: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:306:
+	default: printf("range_cast_u64!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#476: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:328:
+	default: printf("range_cast_s64!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast_s64', this function's name, in a string
#476: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:328:
+	default: printf("range_cast_s64!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#493: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:345:
+	default: printf("range_cast_u32!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast_u32', this function's name, in a string
#493: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:345:
+	default: printf("range_cast_u32!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#510: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:362:
+	default: printf("range_cast_s32!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast_s32', this function's name, in a string
#510: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:362:
+	default: printf("range_cast_s32!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#526: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:378:
+	default: printf("range_cast!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast', this function's name, in a string
#526: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:378:
+	default: printf("range_cast!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#537: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:389:
+	default: printf("is_valid_num!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'is_valid_num', this function's name, in a string
#537: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:389:
+	default: printf("is_valid_num!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#551: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:403:
+	default: printf("is_valid_range!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'is_valid_range', this function's name, in a string
#551: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:403:
+	default: printf("is_valid_range!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#606: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:458:
+	default: printf("complement_op!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'complement_op', this function's name, in a string
#606: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:458:
+	default: printf("complement_op!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#619: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:471:
+	default: printf("op_str!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'op_str', this function's name, in a string
#619: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:471:
+	default: printf("op_str!\n"); exit(1);

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#638: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:490:
+	default: printf("range_canbe op %d\n", op); exit(1);					\

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#643: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:495:
+	case U64: { range_canbe(u64); }

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#644: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:496:
+	case U32: { range_canbe(u32); }

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#645: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:497:
+	case S64: { range_canbe(s64); }

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#646: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:498:
+	case S32: { range_canbe(s32); }

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#647: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:499:
+	default: printf("range_canbe!\n"); exit(1);

WARNING:LINE_SPACING: Missing a blank line after declarations
#933: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:785:
+	struct bpf_insn insns[64];
+	LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_prog_load_opts, opts,

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1014: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:866:
+	case OP_LT: op_code = spec.compare_signed ? BPF_JSLT : BPF_JLT; break;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1015: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:867:
+	case OP_LE: op_code = spec.compare_signed ? BPF_JSLE : BPF_JLE; break;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1016: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:868:
+	case OP_GT: op_code = spec.compare_signed ? BPF_JSGT : BPF_JGT; break;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1017: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:869:
+	case OP_GE: op_code = spec.compare_signed ? BPF_JSGE : BPF_JGE; break;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1018: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:870:
+	case OP_EQ: op_code = BPF_JEQ; break;

ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1019: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:871:
+	case OP_NE: op_code = BPF_JNE; break;

WARNING:BRACES: braces {} are not necessary for single statement blocks
#1153: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:1005:
+		for (t = MIN_T; t <= MAX_T; t++) {
+			reg->r[t] = range(t, sval, sval);
+		}

WARNING:BRACES: braces {} are not necessary for single statement blocks
#1559: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:1411:
+		for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(lower_seeds); j++) {
+			uvals[cnt++] = (((u64)upper_seeds[i]) << 32) | lower_seeds[j];
+		}

ERROR:OPEN_BRACE: that open brace { should be on the previous line
#1566: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:1418:
+	for (i = 1, j = 0; i < cnt; i++)
+	{

WARNING:SUSPECT_CODE_INDENT: suspect code indent for conditional statements (8, 8)
#1665: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:1517:
+	for (i = 0; i < val_cnt; i++)
+	for (j = 0; j < range_cnt; j++)

WARNING:SUSPECT_CODE_INDENT: suspect code indent for conditional statements (8, 8)
#1666: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:1518:
+	for (j = 0; j < range_cnt; j++)
+	for (cond_t = MIN_T; cond_t <= MAX_T; cond_t++) {

-- 
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

next prev parent reply	other threads:[~2023-10-19  7:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-19  4:23 [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/7] BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19  4:23 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/7] bpf: improve JEQ/JNE branch taken logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19  4:24 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/7] bpf: derive smin/smax from umin/max bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19  4:24 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/7] bpf: enhance subregister bounds deduction logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19  4:24 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 4/7] bpf: improve deduction of 64-bit bounds from 32-bit bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19  4:24 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 5/7] bpf: try harder to deduce register bounds from different numeric domains Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19  4:24 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 6/7] bpf: drop knowledge-losing __reg_combine_{32,64}_into_{64,32} logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19  4:24 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19  7:08   ` kernel test robot [this message]
2023-10-19 18:27     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19  7:30   ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-19  7:52     ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-19 18:34       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-20 17:37         ` Srinivas Narayana Ganapathy
2023-10-22  4:42           ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-23 14:05             ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-23 15:52               ` Paul Chaignon
2023-10-23 22:50                 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-24  5:51                   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-24 21:26                     ` Paul Chaignon
2023-10-26 22:47                       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19 18:31     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-20 12:27       ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-21  4:13 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/7] BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements John Fastabend
2023-10-22  4:32   ` Andrii Nakryiko

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=202310191409.pIIb2buD-lkp@intel.com \
    --to=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
    --cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox