November 2022 - Linux-kselftest-mirror

[PATCH v3 1/3] Documentation: KUnit: make usage.rst a superset of tips.rst, remove duplication

by Daniel Latypov

usage.rst had most of the content of the tips.rst page copied over. But it's missing https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.0/dev-tools/kunit/tips.html#customizing-… Copy it over so we can retire tips.rst w/o losing content. And in that process, it also gained a duplicate section about how KUNIT_ASSERT_*() exit the test case early. Remove that. Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov(a)google.com> Reviewed-by: Sadiya Kazi <sadiyakazi(a)google.com> --- Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst | 49 ++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst index 2737863ef365..b0a6c3bc0eeb 100644 --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/usage.rst @@ -118,6 +118,37 @@ expectation could crash the test case. `ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(...)` allows us to bail out of the test case if the appropriate conditions are not satisfied to complete the test. +Customizing error messages +-------------------------- + +Each of the ``KUNIT_EXPECT`` and ``KUNIT_ASSERT`` macros have a ``_MSG`` +variant. These take a format string and arguments to provide additional +context to the automatically generated error messages. + +.. code-block:: c + + char some_str[41]; + generate_sha1_hex_string(some_str); + + /* Before. Not easy to tell why the test failed. */ + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, strlen(some_str), 40); + + /* After. Now we see the offending string. */ + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, strlen(some_str), 40, "some_str='%s'", some_str); + +Alternatively, one can take full control over the error message by using +``KUNIT_FAIL()``, e.g. + +.. code-block:: c + + /* Before */ + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, some_setup_function(), 0); + + /* After: full control over the failure message. */ + if (some_setup_function()) + KUNIT_FAIL(test, "Failed to setup thing for testing"); + + Test Suites ~~~~~~~~~~~ @@ -546,24 +577,6 @@ By reusing the same ``cases`` array from above, we can write the test as a {} }; -Exiting Early on Failed Expectations ------------------------------------- - -We can use ``KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ`` to mark the test as failed and continue -execution. In some cases, it is unsafe to continue. We can use the -``KUNIT_ASSERT`` variant to exit on failure. - -.. code-block:: c - - void example_test_user_alloc_function(struct kunit *test) - { - void *object = alloc_some_object_for_me(); - - /* Make sure we got a valid pointer back. */ - KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, object); - do_something_with_object(object); - } - Allocating Memory ----------------- base-commit: 870f63b7cd78d0055902d839a60408f7428b4e84 -- 2.38.1.431.g37b22c650d-goog

2 years, 1 month

2
4
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 08/18] selftests/bpf: Add verifier test for release_reference()

by Sasha Levin

From: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> [ Upstream commit 475244f5e06beeda7b557d9dde46a5f439bf3379 ] Add a test case to ensure that released pointer registers will not be leaked into the map. Before fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg FAIL Unexpected success to load! verification time 67 usec stack depth 4 processed 23 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 2 peak_states 2 mark_read 1 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED After fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel(a)iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221103093440.3161-2-liulin063@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- .../selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c index 006b5bd99c08..525d810b10b8 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c @@ -901,3 +901,39 @@ .result_unpriv = REJECT, .errstr_unpriv = "unknown func", }, +{ + "reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg", + .insns = { + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -4), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10), + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_reserve), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_discard), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_8, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN() + }, + .fixup_map_array_48b = { 4 }, + .fixup_map_ringbuf = { 11 }, + .result = ACCEPT, + .result_unpriv = REJECT, + .errstr_unpriv = "R8 !read_ok" +}, -- 2.35.1

2 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.15 11/27] selftests/bpf: Add verifier test for release_reference()

by Sasha Levin

From: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> [ Upstream commit 475244f5e06beeda7b557d9dde46a5f439bf3379 ] Add a test case to ensure that released pointer registers will not be leaked into the map. Before fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg FAIL Unexpected success to load! verification time 67 usec stack depth 4 processed 23 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 2 peak_states 2 mark_read 1 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED After fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel(a)iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221103093440.3161-2-liulin063@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- .../selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c index 3b6ee009c00b..4a768b130d61 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c @@ -905,3 +905,39 @@ .result_unpriv = REJECT, .errstr_unpriv = "unknown func", }, +{ + "reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg", + .insns = { + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -4), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10), + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_reserve), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_discard), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_8, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN() + }, + .fixup_map_array_48b = { 4 }, + .fixup_map_ringbuf = { 11 }, + .result = ACCEPT, + .result_unpriv = REJECT, + .errstr_unpriv = "R8 !read_ok" +}, -- 2.35.1

2 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 6.0 16/44] selftests/net: give more time to udpgro bg processes to complete startup

by Sasha Levin

From: Adrien Thierry <athierry(a)redhat.com> [ Upstream commit cdb525ca92b196f8916102b62431aa0d9a644ff2 ] In some conditions, background processes in udpgro don't have enough time to set up the sockets. When foreground processes start, this results in the test failing with "./udpgso_bench_tx: sendmsg: Connection refused". For instance, this happens from time to time on a Qualcomm SA8540P SoC running CentOS Stream 9. To fix this, increase the time given to background processes to complete the startup before foreground processes start. Signed-off-by: Adrien Thierry <athierry(a)redhat.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem(a)davemloft.net> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh | 4 ++-- tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh | 2 +- tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh | 2 +- 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh index ebbd0b282432..6a443ca3cd3a 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ run_one() { echo "failed" & # Hack: let bg programs complete the startup - sleep 0.1 + sleep 0.2 ./udpgso_bench_tx ${tx_args} ret=$? wait $(jobs -p) @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ run_one_2sock() { echo "failed" & # Hack: let bg programs complete the startup - sleep 0.1 + sleep 0.2 ./udpgso_bench_tx ${tx_args} -p 12345 sleep 0.1 # first UDP GSO socket should be closed at this point diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh index fad2d1a71cac..8a1109a545db 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_bench.sh @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ run_one() { ip netns exec "${PEER_NS}" ./udpgso_bench_rx -t ${rx_args} -r & # Hack: let bg programs complete the startup - sleep 0.1 + sleep 0.2 ./udpgso_bench_tx ${tx_args} } diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh index 832c738cc3c2..7fe85ba51075 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro_frglist.sh @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ run_one() { ip netns exec "${PEER_NS}" ./udpgso_bench_rx ${rx_args} -r & # Hack: let bg programs complete the startup - sleep 0.1 + sleep 0.2 ./udpgso_bench_tx ${tx_args} } -- 2.35.1

2 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 6.0 15/44] selftests/bpf: Add verifier test for release_reference()

by Sasha Levin

From: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> [ Upstream commit 475244f5e06beeda7b557d9dde46a5f439bf3379 ] Add a test case to ensure that released pointer registers will not be leaked into the map. Before fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg FAIL Unexpected success to load! verification time 67 usec stack depth 4 processed 23 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 2 peak_states 2 mark_read 1 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED After fix: ./test_verifier 984 984/u reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK 984/p reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg OK Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Youlin Li <liulin063(a)gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel(a)iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221103093440.3161-2-liulin063@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- .../selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c index 57a83d763ec1..6dc65b2501ed 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ref_tracking.c @@ -905,3 +905,39 @@ .result_unpriv = REJECT, .errstr_unpriv = "unknown func", }, +{ + "reference tracking: try to leak released ptr reg", + .insns = { + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -4), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10), + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_reserve), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0), + + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_8), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_discard), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_8, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN() + }, + .fixup_map_array_48b = { 4 }, + .fixup_map_ringbuf = { 11 }, + .result = ACCEPT, + .result_unpriv = REJECT, + .errstr_unpriv = "R8 !read_ok" +}, -- 2.35.1

2 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

[PATCH AUTOSEL 6.0 09/44] selftests/net: don't tests batched TCP io_uring zc

by Sasha Levin

From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence(a)gmail.com> [ Upstream commit 9921d5013a6e51892623bf2f1c5b49eaecda55ac ] It doesn't make sense batch submitting io_uring requests to a single TCP socket without linking or some other kind of ordering. Moreover, it causes spurious -EINTR fails due to interaction with task_work. Disable it for now and keep queue depth=1. Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence(a)gmail.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/b547698d5938b1b1a898af1c260188d8546ded9a.16667008… Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe(a)kernel.dk> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh index 32aa6e9dacc2..9ac4456d48fc 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/io_uring_zerocopy_tx.sh @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ if [[ "$#" -eq "0" ]]; then for IP in "${IPs[@]}"; do for mode in $(seq 1 3); do $0 "$IP" udp -m "$mode" -t 1 -n 32 - $0 "$IP" tcp -m "$mode" -t 1 -n 32 + $0 "$IP" tcp -m "$mode" -t 1 -n 1 done done -- 2.35.1

2 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

[PATCH v2 2/2] KVM: selftests: Build access_tracking_perf_test for arm64

by Oliver Upton

Does exactly what it says on the tin. Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gshan(a)redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton(a)linux.dev> --- tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile index 0172eb6cb6ee..4c0ff91a8964 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile @@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/psci_test TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vcpu_width_config TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_init TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_irq +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += access_tracking_perf_test TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += demand_paging_test TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += dirty_log_test TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += dirty_log_perf_test -- 2.38.1.584.g0f3c55d4c2-goog

2 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

[PATCH v1] kselftest/arm64: Use preferred form for predicate load/stores

by Mark Brown

The preferred form of the str/ldr for predicate registers with an immediate of zero is to omit the zero, and the clang built in assembler rejects the zero immediate. Drop the immediate. Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie(a)kernel.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S index b523c21c2278..acd5e9f3bc0b 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/abi/syscall-abi-asm.S @@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ do_syscall: // Only set a non-zero FFR, test patterns must be zero since the // syscall should clear it - this lets us handle FA64. ldr x2, =ffr_in - ldr p0, [x2, #0] + ldr p0, [x2] ldr x2, [x2, #0] cbz x2, 2f wrffr p0.b @@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ do_syscall: cbz x2, 1f ldr x2, =ffr_out rdffr p0.b - str p0, [x2, #0] + str p0, [x2] 1: // Restore callee saved registers x19-x30 base-commit: 30a0b95b1335e12efef89dd78518ed3e4a71a763 -- 2.30.2

2 years, 1 month

3
3
0 0

[PATCH bpf-next v2] selftests/bpf: Fix error: undeclared identifier 'NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC'

by Rong Tao

From: Rong Tao <rongtao(a)cestc.cn> commit 472caa69183f("netfilter: nat: un-export nf_nat_used_tuple") introduce NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC/DST enum in include/net/netfilter/nf_nat.h, and commit b06b45e82b59("selftests/bpf: add tests for bpf_ct_set_nat_info kfunc") use NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC/DST in test_bpf_nf.c. In bpf kself-test config (tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config) nf_nat is compiled as built-in, this issue occurs just if it is compiled as module. We could use BPF CO-RE and ___suffix rule to avoid this. How to reproduce the error: $ make -C tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ ... CLNG-BPF [test_maps] test_bpf_nf.bpf.o error: use of undeclared identifier 'NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC' bpf_ct_set_nat_info(ct, &saddr, sport, NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC); ^ error: use of undeclared identifier 'NF_NAT_MANIP_DST' bpf_ct_set_nat_info(ct, &daddr, dport, NF_NAT_MANIP_DST); ^ 2 errors generated. Signed-off-by: Rong Tao <rongtao(a)cestc.cn> --- v2: use BPF CO-RE and ___suffix rule to avoid this error. v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/tencent_29D7ABD1744417031AA1B52C914B61158E07@q… --- .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c index 227e85e85dda..1706984e1a6a 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ #include <vmlinux.h> #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h> #include <bpf/bpf_endian.h> +#include <bpf/bpf_core_read.h> #define EAFNOSUPPORT 97 #define EPROTO 71 @@ -11,6 +12,11 @@ extern unsigned long CONFIG_HZ __kconfig; +enum nf_nat_manip_type___x { + NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC___x, + NF_NAT_MANIP_DST___x, +}; + int test_einval_bpf_tuple = 0; int test_einval_reserved = 0; int test_einval_netns_id = 0; @@ -58,7 +64,7 @@ int bpf_ct_change_timeout(struct nf_conn *, u32) __ksym; int bpf_ct_set_status(struct nf_conn *, u32) __ksym; int bpf_ct_change_status(struct nf_conn *, u32) __ksym; int bpf_ct_set_nat_info(struct nf_conn *, union nf_inet_addr *, - int port, enum nf_nat_manip_type) __ksym; + int port, int type) __ksym; static __always_inline void nf_ct_test(struct nf_conn *(*lookup_fn)(void *, struct bpf_sock_tuple *, u32, @@ -151,16 +157,34 @@ nf_ct_test(struct nf_conn *(*lookup_fn)(void *, struct bpf_sock_tuple *, u32, union nf_inet_addr saddr = {}; union nf_inet_addr daddr = {}; struct nf_conn *ct_ins; + int manip_src; + int manip_dst; + enum nf_nat_manip_type___x mapip_type_x; + + if (!bpf_core_type_exists(enum nf_nat_manip_type)) { + bpf_printk("enum nf_nat_manip_type not exist.\n"); + return; + } + + if (bpf_core_enum_value_exists(mapip_type_x, NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC___x)) + manip_src = bpf_core_enum_value(mapip_type_x, NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC___x); + else + return; + + if (bpf_core_enum_value_exists(mapip_type_x, NF_NAT_MANIP_DST___x)) + manip_dst = bpf_core_enum_value(mapip_type_x, NF_NAT_MANIP_DST___x); + else + return; bpf_ct_set_timeout(ct, 10000); ct->mark = 77; /* snat */ saddr.ip = bpf_get_prandom_u32(); - bpf_ct_set_nat_info(ct, &saddr, sport, NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC); + bpf_ct_set_nat_info(ct, &saddr, sport, manip_src); /* dnat */ daddr.ip = bpf_get_prandom_u32(); - bpf_ct_set_nat_info(ct, &daddr, dport, NF_NAT_MANIP_DST); + bpf_ct_set_nat_info(ct, &daddr, dport, manip_dst); ct_ins = bpf_ct_insert_entry(ct); if (ct_ins) { -- 2.31.1

2 years, 1 month

4
4
0 0

[PATCH -next] kselftest/cgroup: fix unexcepted testing failure on test_memcontrol

by limin

When the `test_memcontrol` is run, the following two test cases fail: 1. test_memcg_low The original test case does not address the following issues: First, the memory reclamation behavior is different when memory.min or memory.low is set. Second, when memory.low of a cgroup is set to 0 and the cgroup's father's is set to 50, the value of the low field in the memory.events of the cgroup is greater than 0. 2. test_memcg_swap_max When swap.max is set, the sum of memory.current and memory.swap.current is slightly greater than the allocated memory size. The judgment in the original test case is too strict. some test cases will be failed as following: (the fourth and tenth): $ sudo ./test_memcontrol ok 1 test_memcg_subtree_control ok 2 test_memcg_current ok 3 test_memcg_min not ok 4 test_memcg_low ok 5 test_memcg_high ok 6 test_memcg_high_sync ok 7 test_memcg_max ok 8 test_memcg_reclaim ok 9 test_memcg_oom_events not ok 10 test_memcg_swap_max ok 11 test_memcg_sock ok 12 test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events ok 13 test_memcg_oom_group_parent_events ok 14 test_memcg_oom_group_score_events this patch will correct this unexcepted failure Signed-off-by: limin <limin100(a)huawei.com> Signed-off-by: liaoqixin <liaoqixin(a)huawei.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 10 +++------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c index 883335955..18a1d40b1 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c @@ -381,8 +381,7 @@ static int test_memcg_protection(const char *root, bool min) "memory.low prevents from allocating anon memory\n"); goto cleanup; } - - if (!values_close(cg_read_long(parent[1], "memory.current"), MB(50), 3)) + if (!values_close(cg_read_long(parent[1], "memory.current"), min ? MB(50) : MB(30), 3)) goto cleanup; if (min) { @@ -401,9 +400,6 @@ static int test_memcg_protection(const char *root, bool min) goto cleanup; if (i <= no_low_events_index && low <= 0) goto cleanup; - if (i > no_low_events_index && low) - goto cleanup; - } ret = KSFT_PASS; @@ -768,7 +764,7 @@ static int alloc_anon_50M_check_swap(const char *cgroup, void *arg) swap_current = cg_read_long(cgroup, "memory.swap.current"); if (!swap_current || - !values_close(mem_current + swap_current, size, 3)) + !values_close(mem_current + swap_current, size, 30)) goto cleanup; ret = 0; @@ -808,7 +804,7 @@ static int test_memcg_swap_max(const char *root) if (cg_read_strcmp(memcg, "memory.swap.max", "max\n")) goto cleanup; - if (cg_write(memcg, "memory.swap.max", "30M")) + if (cg_write(memcg, "memory.swap.max", "70M")) goto cleanup; if (cg_write(memcg, "memory.max", "30M")) -- 2.33.0

2 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

Linux-kselftest-mirror November 2022