From: Masoud Aghasi <maghasi@disroot.org>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, ast@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, memxor@gmail.com, martin.lau@linux.dev,
song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, jolsa@kernel.org,
emil@etsalapatis.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,
leon.hwang@linux.dev, Masoud Aghasi <maghasi@disroot.org>
Subject: [PATCH bpf v3 3/3] selftests/bpf: add tests for percpu map flags combination
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2026 17:02:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261003160213.2641506-4-maghasi@disroot.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261003160213.2641506-1-maghasi@disroot.org>
All possible combinations of (BPF_EXIST, BPF_NOEXIST) and
(BPF_F_ALL_CPUS, BPF_F_CPU) flags are covered for all percpu map types.
As BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_CGROUP_STORAGE does not support BPF_NOEXIST and
also in order to reduce the amount of code duplicates, I added its
new test scenarios to the existing cpu_flag_percpu_cgroup_storage test.
But for other percpu map types, I added new tests to be able to
exercise all flag combinations and the edge cases such as percpu LRU
unnecessary deletion issue.
Signed-off-by: Masoud Aghasi <maghasi@disroot.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c | 159 ++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 159 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c
index 7b4a1e24363b..f50f51c91164 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c
@@ -449,6 +449,37 @@ static void test_lru_percpu_hash_cpu_flag_create(void)
test_percpu_map_cpu_flag_create(BPF_MAP_TYPE_LRU_PERCPU_HASH, 0);
}
+static void test_percpu_cgroup_storage_flags_combination(struct bpf_map *map, int nr_cpus,
+ struct bpf_cgroup_storage_key *key)
+{
+ int err;
+ u64 flags = 0;
+ size_t value_sz = sizeof(u32);
+ u32 *values = NULL;
+
+ values = calloc(nr_cpus, value_sz);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(values, "calloc values"))
+ return;
+
+ flags = BPF_NOEXIST | BPF_EXIST;
+ err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, key, sizeof(*key), values, value_sz, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(err, -EINVAL, "bpf_map__update_elem noexist|exist"))
+ goto out;
+
+ flags = BPF_F_ALL_CPUS | BPF_EXIST;
+ err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, key, sizeof(*key), values, value_sz, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem all_cpus|exist"))
+ goto out;
+
+ flags = BPF_F_CPU | BPF_EXIST;
+ err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, key, sizeof(*key), values, value_sz, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem cpu|exist"))
+ goto out;
+
+out:
+ free(values);
+}
+
static void test_percpu_cgroup_storage_cpu_flag(void)
{
struct percpu_alloc_array *skel = NULL;
@@ -489,6 +520,7 @@ static void test_percpu_cgroup_storage_cpu_flag(void)
goto out;
test_percpu_map_op_cpu_flag(map, &key, sizeof(key), 1, nr_cpus, false);
+ test_percpu_cgroup_storage_flags_combination(map, nr_cpus, &key);
out:
bpf_prog_detach2(-1, cgroup, BPF_CGROUP_INET_EGRESS);
close(cgroup);
@@ -537,6 +569,127 @@ static void test_hash_cpu_flag(void)
test_map_op_cpu_flag(BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH);
}
+static void test_percpu_map_flags_combination(enum bpf_map_type map_type)
+{
+ size_t value_sz = 8;
+ void *values = NULL;
+ u32 max_entries = 3, key = 0;
+ u64 flags = 0;
+ int err, map_fd, nr_cpus;
+ bool is_hash_map = (map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_HASH ||
+ map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_LRU_PERCPU_HASH);
+
+ nr_cpus = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
+ if (!ASSERT_GT(nr_cpus, 0, "libbpf_num_possible_cpus"))
+ return;
+
+ values = calloc(nr_cpus, value_sz);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(values, "calloc values"))
+ return;
+
+ map_fd = bpf_map_create(map_type, "test_flags_combination_map",
+ sizeof(u32), value_sz, max_entries, NULL);
+ if (!ASSERT_GE(map_fd, 0, "bpf_map_create")) {
+ free(values);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ flags = BPF_NOEXIST | BPF_EXIST;
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd, &key, values, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(err, -EINVAL, "bpf_map_update_elem noexist|exist"))
+ goto out;
+
+ flags = BPF_F_ALL_CPUS | BPF_NOEXIST;
+ key = 0;
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd, &key, values, flags);
+ if (is_hash_map) {
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map_update_elem all_cpus|noexist"))
+ goto out;
+
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd, &key, values, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(err, -EEXIST, "bpf_map_update_elem all_cpus|noexist"))
+ goto out;
+ } else {
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(err, -EEXIST, "bpf_map_update_elem all_cpus|noexist"))
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ flags = BPF_F_CPU | BPF_NOEXIST;
+ key = 1;
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd, &key, values, flags);
+ if (is_hash_map) {
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map_update_elem cpu|noexist"))
+ goto out;
+
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd, &key, values, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(err, -EEXIST, "bpf_map_update_elem cpu|noexist"))
+ goto out;
+ } else {
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(err, -EEXIST, "bpf_map_update_elem cpu|noexist"))
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ flags = BPF_F_ALL_CPUS | BPF_EXIST;
+ key = 2;
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd, &key, values, flags);
+ if (is_hash_map) {
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(err, -ENOENT, "bpf_map_update_elem all_cpus|exist"))
+ goto out;
+ } else {
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map_update_elem all_cpus|exist"))
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ flags = BPF_F_CPU | BPF_EXIST;
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd, &key, values, flags);
+ if (is_hash_map) {
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(err, -ENOENT, "bpf_map_update_elem cpu|exist"))
+ goto out;
+ } else {
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map_update_elem cpu|exist"))
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ if (map_type != BPF_MAP_TYPE_LRU_PERCPU_HASH)
+ goto out;
+
+ /* Percpu LRU hash map should not delete old entries unnecessarily */
+ flags = BPF_F_ALL_CPUS | BPF_NOEXIST;
+ key = 2;
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd, &key, values, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map_update_elem unnecessary_deletion"))
+ goto out;
+
+ flags = BPF_F_ALL_CPUS | BPF_EXIST;
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd, &key, values, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map_update_elem unnecessary_deletion"))
+ goto out;
+
+ key = 0;
+ err = bpf_map_lookup_elem(map_fd, &key, values);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map_lookup_elem unnecessary_deletion"))
+ goto out;
+
+out:
+ close(map_fd);
+ free(values);
+}
+
+static void test_percpu_hash_flags_combination(void)
+{
+ test_percpu_map_flags_combination(BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_HASH);
+}
+
+static void test_lru_percpu_hash_flags_combination(void)
+{
+ test_percpu_map_flags_combination(BPF_MAP_TYPE_LRU_PERCPU_HASH);
+}
+
+static void test_percpu_array_flags_combination(void)
+{
+ test_percpu_map_flags_combination(BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY);
+}
+
void test_percpu_alloc(void)
{
if (test__start_subtest("array"))
@@ -565,4 +718,10 @@ void test_percpu_alloc(void)
test_array_cpu_flag();
if (test__start_subtest("cpu_flag_hash"))
test_hash_cpu_flag();
+ if (test__start_subtest("cpu_flag_combination_percpu_hash"))
+ test_percpu_hash_flags_combination();
+ if (test__start_subtest("cpu_flag_combination_lru_percpu_hash"))
+ test_lru_percpu_hash_flags_combination();
+ if (test__start_subtest("cpu_flag_combination_percpu_array"))
+ test_percpu_array_flags_combination();
}
--
2.47.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-03 16:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-03 16:02 [PATCH bpf v3 0/3] bpf: Fix incorrect handling of user flags by percpu map updates Masoud Aghasi
2026-10-03 16:02 ` [PATCH bpf v3 1/3] bpf: Fix incorrect handling of user flags in bpf_percpu_array_update Masoud Aghasi
2026-10-03 16:02 ` [PATCH bpf v3 2/3] bpf: Fix incorrect handling of user flags by percpu hash map updates Masoud Aghasi
2026-10-03 16:41 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-03 16:02 ` Masoud Aghasi [this message]
2026-10-03 16:41 ` [PATCH bpf v3 3/3] selftests/bpf: add tests for percpu map flags combination bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-03 17:56 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-04 9:39 ` Masoud Aghasi
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=20261003160213.2641506-4-maghasi@disroot.org \
--to=maghasi@disroot.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@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