[bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Allow building bpf tests with CONFIG_XFRM_INTERFACE=[m|n]

Commit Message

Martin KaFai Lau Dec. 6, 2022, 7:35 p.m. UTC

From: Martin KaFai Lau <[e-mail]>

It is useful to use vmlinux.h in the xfrm_info test like other kfunc
tests do.  In particular, it is common for kfunc bpf prog that requires
to use other core kernel structures in vmlinux.h

Although vmlinux.h is preferred, it needs a ___local flavor of
struct bpf_xfrm_info in order to build the bpf selftests
when CONFIG_XFRM_INTERFACE=[m|n].

Cc: Eyal Birger <[e-mail]>
Fixes: 90a3a05eb33f ("selftests/bpf: add xfrm_info tests")
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <[e-mail]>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xfrm_info.c | 13 +++++++++----
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Comments

[e-mail] Dec. 6, 2022, 9 p.m. UTC | #1

Hello:

This patch was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <[e-mail]>:

On Tue,  6 Dec 2022 11:35:54 -0800 you wrote:
> From: Martin KaFai Lau <[e-mail]>
> 
> It is useful to use vmlinux.h in the xfrm_info test like other kfunc
> tests do.  In particular, it is common for kfunc bpf prog that requires
> to use other core kernel structures in vmlinux.h
> 
> Although vmlinux.h is preferred, it needs a ___local flavor of
> struct bpf_xfrm_info in order to build the bpf selftests
> when CONFIG_XFRM_INTERFACE=[m|n].
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Allow building bpf tests with CONFIG_XFRM_INTERFACE=[m|n]
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/aa67961f3243

You are awesome, thank you!

Patch

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xfrm_info.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xfrm_info.c
index 3acedcdd962d..f6a501fbba2b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xfrm_info.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/xfrm_info.c
@@ -3,18 +3,23 @@ 
 #include "bpf_tracing_net.h"
 #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
 
+struct bpf_xfrm_info___local {
+	u32 if_id;
+	int link;
+} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
+
 __u32 req_if_id;
 __u32 resp_if_id;
 
 int bpf_skb_set_xfrm_info(struct __sk_buff *skb_ctx,
-			  const struct bpf_xfrm_info *from) __ksym;
+			  const struct bpf_xfrm_info___local *from) __ksym;
 int bpf_skb_get_xfrm_info(struct __sk_buff *skb_ctx,
-			  struct bpf_xfrm_info *to) __ksym;
+			  struct bpf_xfrm_info___local *to) __ksym;
 
 SEC("tc")
 int set_xfrm_info(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
-	struct bpf_xfrm_info info = { .if_id = req_if_id };
+	struct bpf_xfrm_info___local info = { .if_id = req_if_id };
 
 	return bpf_skb_set_xfrm_info(skb, &info) ? TC_ACT_SHOT : TC_ACT_UNSPEC;
 }
@@ -22,7 +27,7 @@  int set_xfrm_info(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 SEC("tc")
 int get_xfrm_info(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
-	struct bpf_xfrm_info info = {};
+	struct bpf_xfrm_info___local info = {};
 
 	if (bpf_skb_get_xfrm_info(skb, &info) < 0)
 		return TC_ACT_SHOT;