From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Maxim Khmelevskii" <max@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix flaky refcount asserts in map_kptr_race
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 11:49:48 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260723114948.B55571F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260723114042.559926-2-max@linux.ibm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The polling loop in `wait_for_refs` continues retrying after a fatal error in `read_refs`, causing unnecessary delays and test log spam.
- [Medium] A Time-Of-Check to Time-Of-Use (TOCTOU) race exists between `wait_for_refs()` and the subsequent `ASSERT_EQ()`, which can still cause flaky test failures.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix flaky refcount asserts in map_kptr_race ---
commit a9dbb8ca45d040e8f920633939d7db5945ecaca2
Author: Maxim Khmelevskii <max@linux.ibm.com>
selftests/bpf: Fix flaky refcount asserts in map_kptr_race
bpf_testmod shares objects across tests, including the prog_test_struct.
Refcounter release is deferred behind an RCU grace period, so it may still
be pending. This patch adds wait_for_refs to prevent flaky failures when
other tests have contaminated the refcount.
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/map_kptr_race.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/map_kptr_race.c
> index 506ed55e85289..5a543b3465a80 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/map_kptr_race.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/map_kptr_race.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,15 @@ static int read_refs(struct map_kptr_race *skel)
> return skel->bss->num_of_refs;
> }
>
> +static void wait_for_refs(struct map_kptr_race *skel)
> +{
> + for (int i = 0; i < 500; i++) {
> + if (read_refs(skel) == 2)
> + return;
> + usleep(10 * 1000);
> + }
> +}
> +
[Severity: Medium]
Since read_refs() uses ASSERT_OK() which logs an error message on failure
and returns -1, does this loop introduce a regression by failing to handle
fatal errors correctly?
If read_refs() returns a negative error code (for example, if
bpf_prog_test_run_opts fails), it appears this loop will ignore it and
retry 500 times.
This would result in 500 redundant assertion failures in the test output
and an unnecessary 5-second stall before the test finally fails.
Could we add a check to break early if read_refs() returns a value < 0?
[ ... ]
> @@ -73,6 +82,7 @@ static void test_htab_leak(void)
> sched_yield();
>
> ASSERT_EQ(watcher->bss->map_freed, 1, "map_freed");
> + wait_for_refs(watcher);
> ASSERT_EQ(read_refs(watcher), 2, "htab refcount");
>
[Severity: Medium]
Is there a potential time-of-check to time-of-use regression here that could
still result in flaky tests?
wait_for_refs() waits for the condition and returns, but then the shared
state is read again via ASSERT_EQ(read_refs(watcher), 2).
Because tests run in parallel and share the bpf_testmod kernel module,
another test could increment the refcount in the unprotected window between
wait_for_refs() returning and read_refs() executing inside the assertion.
This same pattern also appears in test_percpu_htab_leak() and
test_sk_ls_leak().
Could wait_for_refs() return the final refcount value or boolean success
status so the double-read can be avoided?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260723114042.559926-2-max@linux.ibm.com?part=1
next parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-23 11:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20260723114042.559926-2-max@linux.ibm.com>
2026-07-23 11:49 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-23 16:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix flaky refcount asserts in map_kptr_race Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
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=20260723114948.B55571F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=max@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@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