From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: thinker.li@gmail.com
Cc: sinquersw@gmail.com, kuifeng@meta.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
ast@kernel.org, song@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
andrii@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next v3 11/11] selftests/bpf: test case for register_bpf_struct_ops().
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 18:19:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6274a121-2d78-5b7e-1774-c193e5653e8b@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230920155923.151136-12-thinker.li@gmail.com>
On 9/20/23 8:59 AM, thinker.li@gmail.com wrote:
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..8219a477b6d6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/* Copyright (c) 2023 Meta Platforms, Inc. and affiliates. */
> +#include <test_progs.h>
> +
> +#include "struct_ops_module.skel.h"
> +#include "testing_helpers.h"
> +
> +static void test_regular_load(void)
> +{
> + struct struct_ops_module *skel;
> + struct bpf_link *link;
> + DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_object_open_opts, opts);
> + int err;
> +
> + printf("test_regular_load\n");
> + skel = struct_ops_module__open_opts(&opts);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "struct_ops_module_open"))
> + return;
> + err = struct_ops_module__load(skel);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "struct_ops_module_load"))
> + return;
> +
> + link = bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(skel->maps.testmod_1);
> + ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_test_mod_1");
> +
> + ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_2_result, 7, "test_2_result");
> +
> + bpf_link__destroy(link);
> +
> + struct_ops_module__destroy(skel);
> +
> + /* Wait for the map to be freed, or we may fail to unload
> + * bpf_testmod.
> + */
> + sleep(1);
Instead of sleep(1), please check if something can be reused from
kern_sync_rcu_tasks_trace() in map_kptr.c such that the wait can be done
deterministically. If not, waiting for a fexit trace on bpf_struct_ops_map_free
probably should work also.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-26 1:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-20 15:59 [RFC bpf-next v3 00/11] Registrating struct_ops types from modules thinker.li
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 01/11] bpf: refactory struct_ops type initialization to a function thinker.li
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 02/11] bpf: add struct_ops_tab to btf thinker.li
2023-09-25 21:10 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 21:45 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 03/11] bpf: add register and unregister functions for struct_ops thinker.li
2023-09-25 23:07 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 23:13 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-25 23:31 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 0:19 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 04/11] bpf: attach a module BTF to a bpf_struct_ops thinker.li
2023-09-25 22:57 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 23:25 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 05/11] bpf: hold module for bpf_struct_ops_map thinker.li
2023-09-25 23:23 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-25 23:42 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 06/11] bpf: validate value_type thinker.li
2023-09-26 1:03 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-27 20:27 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 07/11] bpf, net: switch to storing struct_ops in btf thinker.li
2023-09-26 0:02 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 0:18 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 08/11] bpf: pass attached BTF to find correct type info of struct_ops progs thinker.li
2023-09-25 22:58 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-09-25 23:50 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-26 0:24 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-26 0:58 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 09/11] libbpf: Find correct module BTFs for struct_ops maps and progs thinker.li
2023-09-25 23:09 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-09-26 0:12 ` Kui-Feng Lee
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 10/11] bpf: export btf_ctx_access to modules thinker.li
2023-09-20 15:59 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 11/11] selftests/bpf: test case for register_bpf_struct_ops() thinker.li
2023-09-26 1:19 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2023-09-26 1:33 ` [RFC bpf-next v3 00/11] Registrating struct_ops types from modules Martin KaFai Lau
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=6274a121-2d78-5b7e-1774-c193e5653e8b@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kuifeng@meta.com \
--cc=sinquersw@gmail.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=thinker.li@gmail.com \
/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