From: Mahe Tardy <mahe.tardy@gmail.com>
To: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, daniel@iogearbox.net,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, jordan@jrife.io, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, martin.lau@kernel.org,
eddyz87@gmail.com, clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v7 4/7] selftests/bpf: add bpf_icmp_send kfunc cgroup_skb tests
Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 00:05:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ahYZPw8pvpJifRRS@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1dd140384d8509230a38c31f8753dec9a21f77f585178e41a60746b5f631fb40@mail.kernel.org>
On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 04:20:12PM +0000, bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org wrote:
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/icmp_send_kfunc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/icmp_send_kfunc.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..0dc6b6ceafb4
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/icmp_send_kfunc.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > +static void trigger_prog_read_icmp_errqueue(struct icmp_send *skel, int code)
> > +{
> > + int srv_fd = -1, client_fd = -1;
> > + struct sockaddr_in addr;
> > + socklen_t len = sizeof(addr);
> > +
> > + srv_fd = start_server(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, "127.0.0.1", 0, TIMEOUT_MS);
> > + if (!ASSERT_GE(srv_fd, 0, "start_server"))
> > + return;
>
> Jordan Rife raised a style concern in v6 about using ASSERT_OK_FD
> instead of ASSERT_GE for file descriptor checks. While this was addressed
> for client_fd and cgroup_fd, the srv_fd check here still uses ASSERT_GE.
> Should this be ASSERT_OK_FD for consistency?
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/q46w47cqezttz2otf76tncxu7sovhywy2dqwcbajigp64uhbtz@eimvxfeeexuz/
Indeed, this is a miss, not sure it's worth submitting a new version
just for it, but will be fixed if I need to push another version.
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > +void test_icmp_send_unreach_cgroup(void)
> > +{
> > + struct icmp_send *skel;
> > + int cgroup_fd = -1;
> > +
> > + skel = icmp_send__open_and_load();
> > + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "skel_open"))
> > + goto cleanup;
> > +
> > + cgroup_fd = test__join_cgroup("/icmp_send_unreach_cgroup");
> > + if (!ASSERT_OK_FD(cgroup_fd, "join_cgroup"))
> > + goto cleanup;
> > +
> > + skel->links.egress =
> > + bpf_program__attach_cgroup(skel->progs.egress, cgroup_fd);
> > + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel->links.egress, "prog_attach_cgroup"))
> > + goto cleanup;
> > +
> > + for (int code = 0; code <= NR_ICMP_UNREACH; code++) {
> > + /* The TCP stack reacts differently when asking for
> > + * fragmentation, let's ignore it for now.
> > + */
> > + if (code == ICMP_FRAG_NEEDED)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + trigger_prog_read_icmp_errqueue(skel, code);
> > + ASSERT_EQ(skel->data->kfunc_ret, 0, "kfunc_ret");
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Test an invalid code */
> > + trigger_prog_read_icmp_errqueue(skel, -1);
> > + ASSERT_EQ(skel->data->kfunc_ret, -EINVAL, "kfunc_ret");
> > +
> > +cleanup:
> > + icmp_send__destroy(skel);
> > + close(cgroup_fd);
>
> Jordan Rife raised a concern in v6 about the cleanup path potentially
> closing an invalid file descriptor. Should this be guarded with
> 'if (cgroup_fd != -1)' before calling close(cgroup_fd)?
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/q46w47cqezttz2otf76tncxu7sovhywy2dqwcbajigp64uhbtz@eimvxfeeexuz/
Indeed another miss, could be fixed as well if I send a new version, not
sure it's a big deal.
>
> > +}
>
> [ ... ]
>
>
> ---
> AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
> See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md
>
> CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/26459248718
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-26 22:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-26 15:37 [PATCH bpf-next v7 0/7] bpf: add icmp_send kfunc Mahe Tardy
2026-05-26 15:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 1/7] net: move netfilter nf_reject_fill_skb_dst to core ipv4 Mahe Tardy
2026-05-26 16:20 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-26 15:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 2/7] net: move netfilter nf_reject6_fill_skb_dst to core ipv6 Mahe Tardy
2026-05-26 16:20 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-26 22:02 ` Mahe Tardy
2026-05-26 15:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 3/7] bpf: add bpf_icmp_send kfunc Mahe Tardy
2026-05-26 15:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 4/7] selftests/bpf: add bpf_icmp_send kfunc cgroup_skb tests Mahe Tardy
2026-05-26 16:20 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-26 22:05 ` Mahe Tardy [this message]
2026-05-26 15:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 5/7] selftests/bpf: add bpf_icmp_send kfunc cgroup_skb IPv6 tests Mahe Tardy
2026-05-26 15:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 6/7] selftests/bpf: add bpf_icmp_send kfunc tc tests Mahe Tardy
2026-05-26 15:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 7/7] selftests/bpf: add bpf_icmp_send recursion test Mahe Tardy
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=ahYZPw8pvpJifRRS@gmail.com \
--to=mahe.tardy@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jordan@jrife.io \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--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