From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06b.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E136D3D93 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2022 21:47:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1651096069; x=1682632069; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=mgTxYwY7XUmRdqS8K5XEd2SBGMZ0Jq6/nqVj4/hDmkI=; b=VxKa5qOynOgBpKyem1w6D3F5/pHM+nhoGM/7+aqKk9K9hVBYpk/uYCtm MicVoYoTdRZU5N9Ii9coEuUrZJwg6d8uh+jn3UlmIZLe1EA+esgC3Itdr o5CeAZXa8hlnMKrhGYkbkh/LGAJuvlMOdupHdRV9cQq6XLBRly+lSdtOg 00k3OfxP2qmp9S9JVtjyb4Wq9fUz9K7/Wa40uI1TOL/9oL5CDt7VcUhbk 322UH20/8b4BvjILxEL1ZGgPB5r184XWBlaCpZYF/BM1d0bolS4MHMBBA QF9YfulftK85H0aCwE2KV0CuHvql5ZU0CZEEkZ7++dP5mEXD6+ypy29zJ w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10330"; a="326571228" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,294,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="326571228" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Apr 2022 14:47:49 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.90,294,1643702400"; d="scan'208";a="513901089" Received: from ddavid-mobl2.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.209.54.244]) by orsmga003-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Apr 2022 14:47:49 -0700 Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:47:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Mat Martineau To: Geliang Tang cc: Geliang Tang , MPTCP Upstream Subject: Re: [PATCH mptcp-next] Squash to "selftests: bpf: test bpf_skc_to_mptcp_sock" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <50d4d7a13beec75c5172d81c2c6d037fb74efd79.1650947056.git.geliang.tang@suse.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: mptcp@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-1088677945-1651096069=:58836" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-1088677945-1651096069=:58836 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Wed, 27 Apr 2022, Geliang Tang wrote: > Hi Mat, > > Mat Martineau 于2022年4月27日周三 08:20写道： >> >> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022, Geliang Tang wrote: >> >>> Add CONFIG_MPTCP check. >>> >>> When CONFIG_MPTCP is not enabled, we'll get a clearer error message: >>> >>> libbpf: extern CONFIG_MPTCP (strong) not resolved >>> libbpf: failed to load object './mptcp_sock.o' >>> >>> The message before is like this: >>> >>> libbpf: prog '_sockops': BPF program load failed: Invalid argument >>> libbpf: prog '_sockops': -- BEGIN PROG LOAD LOG -- >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang >>> --- >>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/mptcp_sock.c | 4 ++++ >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >>> >> >> Looks like this also requires CONFIG_IKCONFIG and CONFIG_IKCONFIG_PROC, >> can you also add those to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config? Maybe that >> should be a separate commit, since other bpf test progs appear to rely on >> this undocumented config requirement. > > In my test, this bpf base test still works without CONFIG_IKCONFIG and > CONFIG_IKCONFIG_PROC: > >> ls /proc/config.gz > ls: cannot access '/proc/config.gz': No such file or directory >> sudo ./test_progs -n 103 > #103 mptcp:OK > Summary: 1/3 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > Huh, I wonder what's going on? It fails for me: $ sudo ./test_progs -v -a mptcp bpf_testmod.ko is already unloaded. Loading bpf_testmod.ko... Successfully loaded bpf_testmod.ko. libbpf: failed to open system Kconfig libbpf: failed to load object './mptcp_sock.o' run_test:FAIL:165 test_base:FAIL:227 libbpf: failed to open system Kconfig libbpf: failed to load object './mptcp_sock.o' run_test:FAIL:165 test_base:FAIL:244 #103/1 mptcp/base:FAIL (cgroup_helpers.c:146: errno: Device or resource busy) Removing cgroup: /mnt/cgroup-test-work-dir831/mptcp (cgroup_helpers.c:146: errno: Device or resource busy) Removing cgroup: /mnt/cgroup-test-work-dir831 #103 mptcp:FAIL All error logs: #103 mptcp:FAIL Summary: 0/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED This is with Fedora 35. I'll check the BPF CI to see if there's any information about their configuration that might explain the difference. - Mat > > >> >> - Mat >> >>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/mptcp_sock.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/mptcp_sock.c >>> index 5cfaec4e7245..7b6a25e37de8 100644 >>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/mptcp_sock.c >>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/mptcp_sock.c >>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ >>> >>> char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; >>> __u32 _version SEC("version") = 1; >>> +extern bool CONFIG_MPTCP __kconfig; >>> >>> struct mptcp_storage { >>> __u32 invoked; >>> @@ -46,6 +47,9 @@ int _sockops(struct bpf_sock_ops *ctx) >>> if (!storage) >>> return 1; >>> } else { >>> + if (!CONFIG_MPTCP) >>> + return 1; >>> + >>> msk = bpf_skc_to_mptcp_sock(sk); >>> if (!msk) >>> return 1; >>> -- >>> 2.34.1 >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Mat Martineau >> Intel >> > -- Mat Martineau Intel --0-1088677945-1651096069=:58836--