BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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] selftests/bpf: fix timer/test_bad_ret subtest on test_progs-cpuv4 flavor
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2023 15:30:28 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231208233028.3412690-1-andrii@kernel.org> (raw)

Because test_bad_ret main program is not written in assembly, we don't
control instruction indices in timer_cb_ret_bad() subprog. This bites us
in timer/test_bad_ret subtest, where we see difference between cpuv4 and
other flavors.

For now, make __msg() expectations not rely on instruction indices by
anchoring them around bpf_get_prandom_u32 call. Once we have regex/glob
support for __msg(), this can be expressed a bit more nicely, but for
now just mitigating the problem with available means.

Fixes: e02dea158dda ("selftests/bpf: validate async callback return value check correctness")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/timer_failure.c | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/timer_failure.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/timer_failure.c
index 9fbc69c77bbb..0996c2486f05 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/timer_failure.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/timer_failure.c
@@ -47,9 +47,10 @@ __log_level(2)
 __flag(BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ)
 __failure
 /* check that fallthrough code path marks r0 as precise */
-__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 22: (b7) r0 = 0")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before")
+__msg(": (85) call bpf_get_prandom_u32#7") /* anchor message */
 /* check that branch code path marks r0 as precise */
-__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 24: (85) call bpf_get_prandom_u32#7")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before ") __msg(": (85) call bpf_get_prandom_u32#7")
 __msg("should have been in [0, 0]")
 long BPF_PROG2(test_bad_ret, int, a)
 {
-- 
2.34.1


             reply	other threads:[~2023-12-08 23:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-12-08 23:30 Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2023-12-09  1:00 ` [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix timer/test_bad_ret subtest on test_progs-cpuv4 flavor 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=20231208233028.3412690-1-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