From: Viktor Malik <vmalik@redhat.com>
To: sun jian <sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/bpf: Skip bpffs debug iter checks when unavailable in test_bpffs
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 11:31:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <25faef0f-7943-4c0b-97e4-4a3a45895e25@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABFUUZFQfoVRJ6HJqadHhWNj4FVOk=snuSmuEepMD6jZfyrpJQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 3/11/26 08:55, sun jian wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 8:32 PM Viktor Malik <vmalik@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think this is a good approach as it will mask genuine bugs that
>> would cause the files to be missing/inaccessible with one of the above
>> error codes.
>>
> Hi Viktor,
>
> I don't think this change masks bugs in a silent way. It prints an explicit
> INFO line when maps.debug/progs.debug are unavailable due to
> EPERM/EACCES/ENOENT, and it still fails on other errors or unexpected
> iterator output.
Yeah but automatic CI doesn't care about INFO lines. It cares about
pass/fail status and in this case, the test could falsely appear as
passing, even though there's a bug in bpffs code causing the files not
to exist or have wrong permissions.
>> If you really need to execute the rest of the test cases in the file,
>> how about you split the test into subtests and then just add the failing
>> subtest to your DENYLIST?
>
> Proper subtests would require reworking the current fork-based flow to
> report SKIP/FAIL to the harness, which would be a larger refactor than
> intended here.
I don't think it would be such a big refactoring. You can still use
fork(), you just need to have separate `run` functions for different
subtests. True, the init/teardown phase would be somewhat duplicated but
I wouldn't see that as a big issue (and you can still factor it out).
> My goal is to keep this as a minimal change while still achieving the main
> purpose of this test: exercising the core bpffs operations (pinning and
> renameat2 semantics), which are independent of the debug iterator files,
> and clearly reporting when the iterator checks couldn't be performed.
That's exactly what subtests are for, at least in my view. You want to
check independent operations, you create a separate subtest for each.
That way, you can filter out some subtests if they don't pass in your
environment.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-11 10:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-10 10:21 [PATCH 1/2] selftests/bpf: Fix read_iter buffer termination in test_bpffs Sun Jian
2026-03-10 10:21 ` [PATCH 2/2] selftests/bpf: Skip bpffs debug iter checks when unavailable " Sun Jian
2026-03-10 12:32 ` Viktor Malik
2026-03-11 7:55 ` sun jian
2026-03-11 10:31 ` Viktor Malik [this message]
2026-03-12 21:44 ` Yonghong Song
2026-03-13 2:49 ` sun jian
2026-03-10 12:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] selftests/bpf: Fix read_iter buffer termination " Viktor Malik
2026-03-11 6:47 ` sun jian
2026-03-11 10:38 ` Viktor Malik
2026-03-12 21:41 ` Yonghong Song
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=25faef0f-7943-4c0b-97e4-4a3a45895e25@redhat.com \
--to=vmalik@redhat.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=sun.jian.kdev@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