BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Ricardo B. Marlière" <rbm@suse.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v10 07/11] selftests/bpf: Skip tests whose objects were not built
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2026 13:13:44 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260430131344.B40DDC2BCB3@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260430-selftests-bpf_misconfig-v10-7-cd302a31af16@suse.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Unbuilt tests are completely omitted from the output of `--list` (`-l`) and `--count` modes, undermining the goal of keeping them visible in CI.
--

commit 16f4b9e5278a9d4b4fc723587353c47ffcf761e1
Author: Ricardo B. Marlière <rbm@suse.com>

selftests/bpf: Skip tests whose objects were not built

When both run_test and run_serial_test are NULL (because the corresponding
.test.o was not compiled), mark the test as not built instead of fatally
aborting.

> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
> index cc14b13e23fe1..7ba82974ee784 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -2106,9 +2134,18 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>  
>  	for (i = 0; i < prog_test_cnt; i++) {
>  		struct prog_test_def *test = &prog_test_defs[i];
> +		struct test_state *state = &test_states[i];
>  
> -		if (!test->should_run)
> +		if (!test->should_run) {
> +			if (test->not_built && test->selected &&
> +			    !env.get_test_cnt && !env.list_test_names) {
> +				state->tested = true;
> +				state->skip_cnt = 1;
> +				env.not_built_cnt++;
> +				print_test_result(test, state);
> +			}
>  			continue;

Since should_run is set to false for unbuilt tests, will the unconditional
continue here completely omit unbuilt tests from the output of --list (-l) and
--count modes?

If these tests are omitted during list mode, CI systems that use test_progs -l
to discover, chunk, and distribute tests across parallel jobs won't be aware
of them.

Could this lead to the unbuilt tests quietly disappearing from final CI
results, undermining the goal of keeping them visible?

> +		}
>  
>  		if (env.get_test_cnt) {
>  			env.succ_cnt++;

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260430-selftests-bpf_misconfig-v10-0-cd302a31af16@suse.com?part=7

  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-30 13:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-30 12:53 [PATCH bpf-next v10 00/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate partial builds across kernel configs Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 01/11] selftests/bpf: Add BPF_STRICT_BUILD toggle Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 02/11] selftests/bpf: Fix test_kmods KDIR to honor O= and distro kernels Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:30   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 14:09     ` Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 03/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate BPF and skeleton generation failures Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 04/11] selftests/bpf: Avoid rebuilds when running emit_tests Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 05/11] selftests/bpf: Make skeleton headers order-only prerequisites of .test.d Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:30   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 15:04     ` Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:41   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 06/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate test file compilation failures Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:10   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-30 13:13     ` Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:30   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 07/11] selftests/bpf: Skip tests whose objects were not built Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:13   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-04-30 13:30   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 15:52     ` Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 08/11] selftests/bpf: Allow test_progs to link with a partial object set Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 09/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate benchmark build failures Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 10/11] selftests/bpf: Provide weak definitions for cross-test functions Ricardo B. Marlière
2026-04-30 13:30   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-30 12:53 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 11/11] selftests/bpf: Tolerate missing files during install Ricardo B. Marlière

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=20260430131344.B40DDC2BCB3@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rbm@suse.com \
    --cc=sashiko@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