netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 4/6] bpf: selftests: Move test_ksyms

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: <20211007205549.xklfits3xkdligat@apollo.localdomain>
Date:   Fri, 8 Oct 2021 02:25:49 +0530
From:   Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>
To:     Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
Cc:     bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 4/6] bpf: selftests: Move test_ksyms_weak
 test to lskel, add libbpf test

On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 02:16:09AM IST, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 02:03:49AM IST, Song Liu wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 5:29 PM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Also, avoid using CO-RE features, as lskel doesn't support CO-RE, yet.
> > > Create a file for testing libbpf skeleton as well, so that both
> > > gen_loader and libbpf get tested.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>
> > [...]
> > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_weak_libbpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_weak_libbpf.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..b75725e28647
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_weak_libbpf.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > +
> > > +#include <test_progs.h>
> > > +#include "test_ksyms_weak.skel.h"
> > > +
> > > +void test_ksyms_weak_libbpf(void)
> >
> > This is (almost?) the same as test_weak_syms(), right? Why do we need both?
> >
>
> One includes lskel.h (light skeleton), the other includes skel.h (libbpf
> skeleton). Trying to include both in the same file, it ends up redefining the
> same struct. I am not sure whether adding a prefix/suffix to light skeleton
> struct names is possible now, maybe through another option to bpftool in
> addition to name?

Sorry, I misremembered. The name option is enough, it is because of how I did it
in the Makefile (using LSKELS_EXTRA).  I'll fix this in the next spin.

> [...]

--
Kartikeya