[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a850fe4e-4f67-7209-4793-731f3d88f1f0@meta.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 09:54:53 -0700
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@...a.com>
To: menglong8.dong@...il.com, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com
Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org, yhs@...com,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com,
haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, benbjiang@...cent.com,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 3/3] selftests/bpf: add testcase for TRACING
with 6+ arguments
On 6/19/23 4:49 AM, menglong8.dong@...il.com wrote:
> From: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
>
> Add test9/test10 in fexit_test.c and fentry_test.c to test the fentry
> and fexit whose target function have 7/11 arguments.
>
> Correspondingly, add bpf_testmod_fentry_test7() and
> bpf_testmod_fentry_test11() to bpf_testmod.c
>
> Meanwhile, add bpf_modify_return_test2() to test_run.c to test the
> MODIFY_RETURN with 7 arguments.
>
> Add bpf_testmod_test_struct_arg_7/bpf_testmod_test_struct_arg_7 in
> bpf_testmod.c to test the struct in the arguments.
>
> And the testcases passed:
>
> ./test_progs -t fexit
> Summary: 5/12 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>
> ./test_progs -t fentry
> Summary: 3/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>
> ./test_progs -t modify_return
> Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>
> ./test_progs -t tracing_struct
> Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>
> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists