linux-kernel - [PATCH bpf-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: Remove the casting about jited_ksyms and jited

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220716125108.1011206-6-pulehui@huawei.com>
Date:   Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:51:08 +0800
From:   Pu Lehui <pulehui@...wei.com>
To:     <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        "Jean-Philippe Brucker" <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        Pu Lehui <pulehui@...wei.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: Remove the casting about jited_ksyms and jited_linfo

We have unified data extension operation of jited_ksyms and jited_linfo
into zero extension, so there's no need to cast u64 memory address to
long data type.

Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@...wei.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf.c | 16 +++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf.c
index e852a9df779d..db10fa1745d1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf.c
@@ -6613,8 +6613,9 @@ static int test_get_linfo(const struct prog_info_raw_test *test,
 	}
 
 	if (CHECK(jited_linfo[0] != jited_ksyms[0],
-		  "jited_linfo[0]:%lx != jited_ksyms[0]:%lx",
-		  (long)(jited_linfo[0]), (long)(jited_ksyms[0]))) {
+		  "jited_linfo[0]:%llx != jited_ksyms[0]:%llx",
+		  (unsigned long long)(jited_linfo[0]),
+		  (unsigned long long)(jited_ksyms[0]))) {
 		err = -1;
 		goto done;
 	}
@@ -6632,16 +6633,17 @@ static int test_get_linfo(const struct prog_info_raw_test *test,
 		}
 
 		if (CHECK(jited_linfo[i] <= jited_linfo[i - 1],
-			  "jited_linfo[%u]:%lx <= jited_linfo[%u]:%lx",
-			  i, (long)jited_linfo[i],
-			  i - 1, (long)(jited_linfo[i - 1]))) {
+			  "jited_linfo[%u]:%llx <= jited_linfo[%u]:%llx",
+			  i, (unsigned long long)jited_linfo[i],
+			  i - 1, (unsigned long long)(jited_linfo[i - 1]))) {
 			err = -1;
 			goto done;
 		}
 
 		if (CHECK(jited_linfo[i] - cur_func_ksyms > cur_func_len,
-			  "jited_linfo[%u]:%lx - %lx > %u",
-			  i, (long)jited_linfo[i], (long)cur_func_ksyms,
+			  "jited_linfo[%u]:%llx - %llx > %u",
+			  i, (unsigned long long)jited_linfo[i],
+			  (unsigned long long)cur_func_ksyms,
 			  cur_func_len)) {
 			err = -1;
 			goto done;
-- 
2.25.1