From: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
To: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
Cc: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, <andrii@kernel.org>, <ast@kernel.org>,
<daniel@iogearbox.net>, <jakub@cloudflare.com>,
<kernel-patches-bot@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Correct map_fd to data_fd in tailcalls
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 22:49:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZPjl5is9OKK7Anjs@boxer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230906154256.95461-1-hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 11:42:56PM +0800, Leon Hwang wrote:
> Get and check data_fd. It should not check map_fd again.
>
> Meanwhile, correct some 'return' to 'goto out'.
>
> Thank the suggestion from Maciej in "bpf, x64: Fix tailcall infinite
> loop"[0] discussions.
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/e496aef8-1f80-0f8e-dcdd-25a8c300319a@gmail.com/T/#m7d3b601066ba66400d436b7e7579b2df4a101033
in the subject of the patch you should have 'bpf', not 'bpf-next'.
Fix this and send v2 please. You can also include my:
Reviewed-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
>
> Fixes: 79d49ba048ec ("bpf, testing: Add various tail call test cases")
> Fixes: 3b0379111197 ("selftests/bpf: Add tailcall_bpf2bpf tests")
> Fixes: 5e0b0a4c52d3 ("selftests/bpf: Test tail call counting with bpf2bpf and data on stack")
> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
> ---
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tailcalls.c | 32 +++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tailcalls.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tailcalls.c
> index 58fe2c586ed76..09c189761926c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tailcalls.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tailcalls.c
> @@ -271,11 +271,11 @@ static void test_tailcall_count(const char *which)
>
> data_map = bpf_object__find_map_by_name(obj, "tailcall.bss");
> if (CHECK_FAIL(!data_map || !bpf_map__is_internal(data_map)))
> - return;
> + goto out;
>
> data_fd = bpf_map__fd(data_map);
> - if (CHECK_FAIL(map_fd < 0))
> - return;
> + if (CHECK_FAIL(data_fd < 0))
> + goto out;
>
> i = 0;
> err = bpf_map_lookup_elem(data_fd, &i, &val);
> @@ -352,11 +352,11 @@ static void test_tailcall_4(void)
>
> data_map = bpf_object__find_map_by_name(obj, "tailcall.bss");
> if (CHECK_FAIL(!data_map || !bpf_map__is_internal(data_map)))
> - return;
> + goto out;
>
> data_fd = bpf_map__fd(data_map);
> - if (CHECK_FAIL(map_fd < 0))
> - return;
> + if (CHECK_FAIL(data_fd < 0))
> + goto out;
>
> for (i = 0; i < bpf_map__max_entries(prog_array); i++) {
> snprintf(prog_name, sizeof(prog_name), "classifier_%d", i);
> @@ -442,11 +442,11 @@ static void test_tailcall_5(void)
>
> data_map = bpf_object__find_map_by_name(obj, "tailcall.bss");
> if (CHECK_FAIL(!data_map || !bpf_map__is_internal(data_map)))
> - return;
> + goto out;
>
> data_fd = bpf_map__fd(data_map);
> - if (CHECK_FAIL(map_fd < 0))
> - return;
> + if (CHECK_FAIL(data_fd < 0))
> + goto out;
>
> for (i = 0; i < bpf_map__max_entries(prog_array); i++) {
> snprintf(prog_name, sizeof(prog_name), "classifier_%d", i);
> @@ -631,11 +631,11 @@ static void test_tailcall_bpf2bpf_2(void)
>
> data_map = bpf_object__find_map_by_name(obj, "tailcall.bss");
> if (CHECK_FAIL(!data_map || !bpf_map__is_internal(data_map)))
> - return;
> + goto out;
>
> data_fd = bpf_map__fd(data_map);
> - if (CHECK_FAIL(map_fd < 0))
> - return;
> + if (CHECK_FAIL(data_fd < 0))
> + goto out;
>
> i = 0;
> err = bpf_map_lookup_elem(data_fd, &i, &val);
> @@ -805,11 +805,11 @@ static void test_tailcall_bpf2bpf_4(bool noise)
>
> data_map = bpf_object__find_map_by_name(obj, "tailcall.bss");
> if (CHECK_FAIL(!data_map || !bpf_map__is_internal(data_map)))
> - return;
> + goto out;
>
> data_fd = bpf_map__fd(data_map);
> - if (CHECK_FAIL(map_fd < 0))
> - return;
> + if (CHECK_FAIL(data_fd < 0))
> + goto out;
>
> i = 0;
> val.noise = noise;
> @@ -872,7 +872,7 @@ static void test_tailcall_bpf2bpf_6(void)
> ASSERT_EQ(topts.retval, 0, "tailcall retval");
>
> data_fd = bpf_map__fd(obj->maps.bss);
> - if (!ASSERT_GE(map_fd, 0, "bss map fd"))
> + if (!ASSERT_GE(data_fd, 0, "bss map fd"))
> goto out;
>
> i = 0;
>
> base-commit: 05ae0b55e72dca3e22598c7f231b86b6c3b69d83
> --
> 2.41.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-06 20:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-06 15:42 [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Correct map_fd to data_fd in tailcalls Leon Hwang
2023-09-06 20:49 ` Maciej Fijalkowski [this message]
2023-09-06 23:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-09-12 0:30 ` 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=ZPjl5is9OKK7Anjs@boxer \
--to=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=hffilwlqm@gmail.com \
--cc=jakub@cloudflare.com \
--cc=kernel-patches-bot@fb.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