netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/5] selftests/bpf: rename bpf_fentry_test{7,8,9} to bpf_fentry_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: Fri, 2 Jun 2023 17:44:56 +0800
From: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com>
To: olsajiri@...il.com
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org, 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, tglx@...utronix.de, 
	mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, 
	hpa@...or.com, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, 
	mykolal@...com, shuah@...nel.org, benbjiang@...cent.com, iii@...ux.ibm.com, 
	imagedong@...cent.com, xukuohai@...wei.com, chantr4@...il.com, 
	zwisler@...gle.com, eddyz87@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/5] selftests/bpf: rename bpf_fentry_test{7,8,9}
 to bpf_fentry_test_ptr*

On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 3:03 PM <menglong8.dong@...il.com> wrote:
>
> From: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
>
> To make it more clear, let's make the N in bpf_fentry_testN as the count
> of target function arguments. Therefore, let's rename
> bpf_fentry_test{7,8,9} to bpf_fentry_test_ptr{1,2,3}.
>
> Meanwhile, to stop the checkpatch complaining, move the "noinline" ahead
> of "int".
>
> Reviewed-by: Jiang Biao <benbjiang@...cent.com>
> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
> ---
>  net/bpf/test_run.c                            | 12 +++++-----
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_cookie.c     | 24 +++++++++----------
>  .../bpf/prog_tests/kprobe_multi_test.c        | 16 ++++++-------
>  .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c | 16 ++++++-------
>  .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c  | 16 ++++++-------
>  .../selftests/bpf/progs/get_func_ip_test.c    |  2 +-
>  .../selftests/bpf/progs/kprobe_multi.c        | 12 +++++-----
>  .../bpf/progs/verifier_btf_ctx_access.c       |  2 +-
>  .../selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_fetch_add.c |  4 ++--
>  9 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
>

Sadly, this patch breaks the "bpf_fentry_test?" pattern in
kprobe_multi.c and kprobe_multi_test.c.

I'm considering changing the "bpf_fentry_test?" to
"bpf_fentry_test*" to solve this problem.

Another option, we can remove kretprobe_test7_result
and kretprobe_test8_result and only check
bpf_fentry_test1~6 in kprobe_multi_check.

Or......maybe I shouldn't rename them?