Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] libtracefs: Unit test for tracefs_instance_reset()

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 07:11:24 +0300
"Tzvetomir Stoyanov (VMware)" <tz.stoyanov@gmail.com> wrote:

> +static void test_instance_reset(void)
> +{
> +	struct tracefs_instance *instance = NULL;
> +	const char *name = get_rand_str();
> +
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_exists(name) == false);
> +	instance = tracefs_instance_create(name);
> +	CU_TEST(instance != NULL);
> +
> +	CU_TEST(test_instance_check_default_state(instance) == true);
> +
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_tracer_set(instance, TRACEFS_TRACER_HWLAT) == 0);
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_event_enable(instance, "bridge", "fdb_delete") == 0);

Was there a reason why you picked HWLAT tracer and the fdb_delete trace
event? Neither exist in my test machine setup, so this test
automatically fails.

-- Steve


> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_file_write(instance, "set_ftrace_pid", "5") > 0);
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_file_write(instance, "trace_clock", "global") > 0);
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_file_write(instance, "set_event_pid", "5") > 0);
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_file_write(instance, "set_ftrace_filter",
> +						      "schedule:stacktrace") > 0);
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_file_write(instance, "set_ftrace_notrace",
> +						      "schedule:stacktrace") > 0);
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_file_write(instance, "tracing_cpumask", "0f") > 0);
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_file_write(instance, "events/syscalls/sys_exit_read/trigger",
> +						      "enable_event:kmem:kmalloc:1") > 0);
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_file_write(instance, "events/bridge/fdb_delete/filter",
> +						      "common_pid == 5") > 0);
> +
> +	CU_TEST(test_instance_check_default_state(instance) == false);
> +
> +	tracefs_instance_reset(instance);
> +	CU_TEST(test_instance_check_default_state(instance) == true);
> +
> +	CU_TEST(tracefs_instance_destroy(instance) == 0);
> +	tracefs_instance_free(instance);
> +}
> +