Re: [PATCH bpf-next 01/10] selftests/bpf: test_tunnel: Add generic_attach* helpers

[Bastien Curutchet <bastien.curutchet@bootlin.com>]

Hi Stanislav,

On 2/27/25 11:08 PM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 02/27, Bastien Curutchet (eBPF Foundation) wrote:
>> A fair amount of code duplication is present among tests to attach BPF
>> programs.
>>
>> Create generic_attach* helpers that attach BPF programs to a given
>> interface.
>> Use ASSERT_OK_FD() instead of ASSERT_GE() to check fd's validity.
>> Use these helpers in all the available tests.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bastien Curutchet (eBPF Foundation) <bastien.curutchet@bootlin.com>
>> ---
>>   .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c | 128 ++++++++++-----------
>>   1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c
>> index cec746e77cd3abdf561cfc2422fa0a934fc481cd..27a8c8caa87e4c6b39b2b26c2aa9860b131a70a9 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tunnel.c
>> @@ -397,6 +397,56 @@ static int attach_tc_prog(struct bpf_tc_hook *hook, int igr_fd, int egr_fd)
>>   	return 0;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static int generic_attach(const char *dev, int igr_fd, int egr_fd)
>> +{
>> +	DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_hook, tc_hook, .attach_point = BPF_TC_INGRESS);
> 
> nit: .attach_point = BPF_TC_INGRESS is a bit confusing to me here
> (because we later attach both ingress and egress progs); mostly
> because the way attach_tc_prog is written I think. Can we move
> tc_hook definition to attach_tc_prog and make it
> .attach_point=BPF_TC_INGRESS|BPF_TC_EGRESS? And then we can make
> attach_tc_prog accept ifindex instead of tc_hook.
> 
> int attach_tc_prog(int ifindex, igr_fd, egr_fd)
> {
> 	DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_hook, tc_hook, .attach_point = BPF_TC_INGRESS|BPF_TC_EGRESS);
> 
> 	bpf_tc_hook_create(&tc_hook);
> 	if (igr_fd >= 0) {
> 		tc_hook.attach_point = BPF_TC_INGRESS;
> 		...
> 	}
> 	if (egr_fd >= 0) {
> 		tc_hook.attach_point = BPF_TC_EGRESS;
> 		...
> 	}
> }
> 
> Or is it just me?

I agree with you, it will be better this way. I'll do it in V2.


Best regards,
Bastien