| Message ID | 20240905075622.66819-3-lulie@linux.alibaba.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | bpf: Allow skb dynptr for tp_btf | expand |
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 12:56 AM Philo Lu <lulie@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > Add a tracepoint with __nullable suffix in bpf_testmod, and add a > failure load case: > > $./test_progs -t "module_attach" > #173/1 module_attach/handle_tp_btf_nullable_bare:OK > #173 module_attach:OK > Summary: 1/1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > Signed-off-by: Philo Lu <lulie@linux.alibaba.com> > --- > .../bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod-events.h | 6 ++++++ > .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 2 ++ > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/module_attach.c | 14 +++++++++++++- > .../bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 4 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c > [...] > + > +static void module_attach_fail(void) > +{ > + RUN_TESTS(test_module_attach_fail); > +} > + > +void test_module_attach(void) > +{ > + module_attach_succ(); > + module_attach_fail(); > +} this is not a good idea to combine existing non-RUN_TESTS test with RUN_TESTS. The latter is a subtest, while the former is a full test. Keep them separate, just add a new file for RUN_TESTS(test_module_attach_fail), or add them to existing RUN_TESTS(), whatever makes most sense. > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..0f848d8f2f5e8 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c > @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > + > +#include "vmlinux.h" > +#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> > +#include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h> > +#include "../bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h" > +#include "bpf_misc.h" > + > +SEC("tp_btf/bpf_testmod_test_nullable_bare") > +__failure __msg("invalid mem access") would be nice to confirm that register corresponding to nullable_ctx actually has "_or_null" suffix > +int BPF_PROG(handle_tp_btf_nullable_bare, struct bpf_testmod_test_read_ctx *nullable_ctx) > +{ > + return nullable_ctx->len; > +} > + > +char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; > -- > 2.32.0.3.g01195cf9f > >
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod-events.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod-events.h index 11ee801e75e7e..6c3b4d4f173ac 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod-events.h +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod-events.h @@ -34,6 +34,12 @@ DECLARE_TRACE(bpf_testmod_test_write_bare, TP_ARGS(task, ctx) ); +/* Used in bpf_testmod_test_read() to test __nullable suffix */ +DECLARE_TRACE(bpf_testmod_test_nullable_bare, + TP_PROTO(struct bpf_testmod_test_read_ctx *ctx__nullable), + TP_ARGS(ctx__nullable) +); + #undef BPF_TESTMOD_DECLARE_TRACE #ifdef DECLARE_TRACE_WRITABLE #define BPF_TESTMOD_DECLARE_TRACE(call, proto, args, size) \ diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c index c73d04bc9e9de..9649e7f09fc90 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c @@ -394,6 +394,8 @@ bpf_testmod_test_read(struct file *file, struct kobject *kobj, if (bpf_testmod_loop_test(101) > 100) trace_bpf_testmod_test_read(current, &ctx); + trace_bpf_testmod_test_nullable_bare(NULL); + /* Magic number to enable writable tp */ if (len == 64) { struct bpf_testmod_test_writable_ctx writable = { diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/module_attach.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/module_attach.c index 6d391d95f96e0..961d8577d6fab 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/module_attach.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/module_attach.c @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ #include <test_progs.h> #include <stdbool.h> #include "test_module_attach.skel.h" +#include "test_module_attach_fail.skel.h" #include "testing_helpers.h" static int duration; @@ -33,7 +34,7 @@ static int trigger_module_test_writable(int *val) return 0; } -void test_module_attach(void) +static void module_attach_succ(void) { const int READ_SZ = 456; const int WRITE_SZ = 457; @@ -115,3 +116,14 @@ void test_module_attach(void) cleanup: test_module_attach__destroy(skel); } + +static void module_attach_fail(void) +{ + RUN_TESTS(test_module_attach_fail); +} + +void test_module_attach(void) +{ + module_attach_succ(); + module_attach_fail(); +} diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000..0f848d8f2f5e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +#include "vmlinux.h" +#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> +#include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h> +#include "../bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h" +#include "bpf_misc.h" + +SEC("tp_btf/bpf_testmod_test_nullable_bare") +__failure __msg("invalid mem access") +int BPF_PROG(handle_tp_btf_nullable_bare, struct bpf_testmod_test_read_ctx *nullable_ctx) +{ + return nullable_ctx->len; +} + +char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
Add a tracepoint with __nullable suffix in bpf_testmod, and add a failure load case: $./test_progs -t "module_attach" #173/1 module_attach/handle_tp_btf_nullable_bare:OK #173 module_attach:OK Summary: 1/1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Philo Lu <lulie@linux.alibaba.com> --- .../bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod-events.h | 6 ++++++ .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 2 ++ .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/module_attach.c | 14 +++++++++++++- .../bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_module_attach_fail.c