[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzZoOw=1B8vV53iAxz8LDULOPVF-he4C_usoUQSdXU+oSg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 17:03:25 -0700
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@...volk.io>
Cc: open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alban Crequy <alban@...volk.io>,
Iago López Galeiras <iago@...volk.io>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
xdp-newbies@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bpf-next v3 04/12] selftests/bpf: Use bpf_prog_test_run_xattr
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:43 PM Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@...volk.io> wrote:
>
> The bpf_prog_test_run_xattr function gives more options to set up a
> test run of a BPF program than the bpf_prog_test_run function.
>
> We will need this extra flexibility to pass ctx data later.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@...volk.io>
> ---
lgtm, with some nits below
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> index c7541f572932..1640ba9f12c1 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> @@ -822,14 +822,20 @@ static int do_prog_test_run(int fd_prog, bool unpriv, uint32_t expected_val,
> {
> __u8 tmp[TEST_DATA_LEN << 2];
> __u32 size_tmp = sizeof(tmp);
nit: this is now is not needed as a separate local variable, inline?
> - uint32_t retval;
> int saved_errno;
> int err;
> + struct bpf_prog_test_run_attr attr = {
> + .prog_fd = fd_prog,
> + .repeat = 1,
> + .data_in = data,
> + .data_size_in = size_data,
> + .data_out = tmp,
> + .data_size_out = size_tmp,
> + };
>
> if (unpriv)
> set_admin(true);
> - err = bpf_prog_test_run(fd_prog, 1, data, size_data,
> - tmp, &size_tmp, &retval, NULL);
> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_xattr(&attr);
> saved_errno = errno;
> if (unpriv)
> set_admin(false);
> @@ -846,9 +852,9 @@ static int do_prog_test_run(int fd_prog, bool unpriv, uint32_t expected_val,
> return err;
> }
> }
> - if (retval != expected_val &&
> + if (attr.retval != expected_val &&
> expected_val != POINTER_VALUE) {
this if condition now fits one line, can you please combine? thanks!
> - printf("FAIL retval %d != %d ", retval, expected_val);
> + printf("FAIL retval %d != %d ", attr.retval, expected_val);
> return 1;
> }
>
> --
> 2.20.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists