netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/2] selftests/bpf: do not export subtest as standalone test

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]

Date:   Mon, 7 Feb 2022 10:17:00 -0800
From:   Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
To:     Hou Tao <hotforest@...il.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
CC:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        <houtao1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/2] selftests/bpf: do not export subtest as
 standalone test



On 2/5/22 8:31 PM, Hou Tao wrote:
> Two subtests in ksyms_module.c are not qualified as static, so these
> subtests are exported as standalone tests in tests.h and lead to
> confusion for the output of "./test_progs -t ksyms_module".
> 
> By using the following command:
> 
>    grep "^void \(serial_\)\?test_[a-zA-Z0-9_]\+(\(void\)\?)" \
>        tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/*.c | \
> 	awk -F : '{print $1}' | sort | uniq -c | awk '$1 != 1'
> 
> Find out that other tests also have the similar problem, so fix
> these tests by marking subtests in these tests as static. For
> xdp_adjust_frags.c, there is just one subtest, so just export
> the subtest directly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@...wei.com>
> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c      | 4 ++--
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_adjust_frags.c  | 6 ------
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_adjust_tail.c   | 4 ++--
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_cpumap_attach.c | 4 ++--
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_devmap_attach.c | 2 +-
>   5 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c
> index ecc58c9e7631..a1ebac70ec29 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c
> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
>   #include "test_ksyms_module.lskel.h"
>   #include "test_ksyms_module.skel.h"
>   
> -void test_ksyms_module_lskel(void)
> +static void test_ksyms_module_lskel(void)
>   {
>   	struct test_ksyms_module_lskel *skel;
>   	int err;
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ void test_ksyms_module_lskel(void)
>   	test_ksyms_module_lskel__destroy(skel);
>   }
>   
> -void test_ksyms_module_libbpf(void)
> +static void test_ksyms_module_libbpf(void)
>   {
>   	struct test_ksyms_module *skel;
>   	int err;
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_adjust_frags.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_adjust_frags.c
> index 134d0ac32f59..fc2d8fa8dac5 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_adjust_frags.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_adjust_frags.c
> @@ -102,9 +102,3 @@ void test_xdp_update_frags(void)
>   out:
>   	bpf_object__close(obj);
>   }
> -
> -void test_xdp_adjust_frags(void)
> -{
> -	if (test__start_subtest("xdp_adjust_frags"))
> -		test_xdp_update_frags();
> -}

I suggest keep test_xdp_adjust_frags and mark
test_xdp_update_frags as static function, and
this is also good for future extension.
It is confusing that test_xdp_update_frags
test in file xdp_adjust_frags.c. Typical
prog_tests/ test has {test,serial_test}_<TEST> test
with file name <TEST>.c file.

[...]