BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>
To: Dmitrii Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
	andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org,
	yonghong.song@linux.dev, dan.carpenter@linaro.org,
	olsajiri@gmail.com, asavkov@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v7 4/4] selftests/bpf: Test re-attachment fix for bpf_tracing_prog_attach
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 13:30:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZXcAi9Hmdtu5Hfbh@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231208185557.8477-5-9erthalion6@gmail.com>

On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 07:55:56PM +0100, Dmitrii Dolgov wrote:
> Add a test case to verify the fix for "prog->aux->dst_trampoline and
> tgt_prog is NULL" branch in bpf_tracing_prog_attach. The sequence of
> events:
> 
> 1. load rawtp program
> 2. load fentry program with rawtp as target_fd
> 3. create tracing link for fentry program with target_fd = 0
> 4. repeat 3
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dmitrii Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
> ---
>  .../bpf/prog_tests/recursive_attach.c         | 48 +++++++++++++++++++
>  .../bpf/progs/fentry_recursive_target.c       | 11 +++++
>  2 files changed, 59 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/recursive_attach.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/recursive_attach.c
> index 7248d0661ee9..6296bcf95481 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/recursive_attach.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/recursive_attach.c
> @@ -67,3 +67,51 @@ void test_recursive_fentry_attach(void)
>  			fentry_recursive__destroy(tracing_chain[i]);
>  	}
>  }
> +
> +/*
> + * Test that a tracing prog reattachment (when we land in
> + * "prog->aux->dst_trampoline and tgt_prog is NULL" branch in
> + * bpf_tracing_prog_attach) does not lead to a crash due to missing attach_btf
> + */
> +void test_fentry_attach_btf_presence(void)
> +{
> +	struct fentry_recursive_target *target_skel = NULL;
> +	struct fentry_recursive *tracing_skel = NULL;
> +	struct bpf_program *prog;
> +	int err, link_fd, tgt_prog_fd;
> +
> +	target_skel = fentry_recursive_target__open_and_load();
> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(target_skel, "fentry_recursive_target__open_and_load"))
> +		goto close_prog;
> +
> +	tracing_skel = fentry_recursive__open();
> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(tracing_skel, "fentry_recursive__open"))
> +		goto close_prog;
> +
> +	prog = tracing_skel->progs.recursive_attach;
> +	tgt_prog_fd = bpf_program__fd(target_skel->progs.fentry_target);
> +	err = bpf_program__set_attach_target(prog, tgt_prog_fd, "fentry_target");
> +	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_program__set_attach_target"))
> +		goto close_prog;
> +
> +	err = fentry_recursive__load(tracing_skel);
> +	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "fentry_recursive__load"))
> +		goto close_prog;
> +
> +	LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_link_create_opts, link_opts);

we don't need link_opts, you can pass NULL to below bpf_link_create call

> +
> +	link_fd = bpf_link_create(bpf_program__fd(tracing_skel->progs.recursive_attach),
> +							  0, BPF_TRACE_FENTRY, &link_opts);

wrong indentation

> +	if (!ASSERT_GE(link_fd, 0, "link_fd"))
> +		goto close_prog;
> +
> +	fentry_recursive__detach(tracing_skel);
> +
> +	err = fentry_recursive__attach(tracing_skel);
> +	if (!ASSERT_ERR(err, "fentry_recursive__attach"))
> +		goto close_prog;

no need to call goto in here, let's just have ASSERT_ERR without the if

> +
> +close_prog:
> +	fentry_recursive_target__destroy(target_skel);
> +	fentry_recursive__destroy(tracing_skel);
> +}
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_recursive_target.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_recursive_target.c
> index b6fb8ebd598d..f812d2de0c3c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_recursive_target.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_recursive_target.c
> @@ -18,3 +18,14 @@ int BPF_PROG(test1, int a)
>  	test1_result = a == 1;
>  	return 0;
>  }
> +
> +/*
> + * Dummy bpf prog for testing attach_btf presence when attaching an fentry
> + * program.
> + */
> +SEC("raw_tp/sys_enter")
> +int BPF_PROG(fentry_target, struct pt_regs *regs, long id)
> +{
> +	test1_result = id == 1;

please remove test1_result

thanks,
jirka

> +	return 0;
> +}
> -- 
> 2.41.0
> 

      reply	other threads:[~2023-12-11 12:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-12-08 18:55 [PATCH bpf-next v7 0/4] Relax tracing prog recursive attach rules Dmitrii Dolgov
2023-12-08 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 1/4] bpf: " Dmitrii Dolgov
2023-12-11 12:30   ` Jiri Olsa
2023-12-11 18:49     ` Dmitry Dolgov
2023-12-12  9:56       ` Jiri Olsa
2023-12-08 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 2/4] selftests/bpf: Add test for recursive attachment of tracing progs Dmitrii Dolgov
2023-12-11 12:30   ` Jiri Olsa
2023-12-11 19:09     ` Dmitry Dolgov
2023-12-08 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 3/4] bpf: Fix re-attachment branch in bpf_tracing_prog_attach Dmitrii Dolgov
2023-12-08 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 4/4] selftests/bpf: Test re-attachment fix for bpf_tracing_prog_attach Dmitrii Dolgov
2023-12-11 12:30   ` Jiri Olsa [this message]

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=ZXcAi9Hmdtu5Hfbh@krava \
    --to=olsajiri@gmail.com \
    --cc=9erthalion6@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=asavkov@redhat.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --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