On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 08:59:11PM +0800, menglong8.dong@gmail.com wrote:
From: Menglong Dong imagedong@tencent.com
Add test9/test10 in fexit_test.c and fentry_test.c to test the fentry and fexit whose target function have 7/12 arguments.
Correspondingly, add bpf_testmod_fentry_test7() and bpf_testmod_fentry_test12() to bpf_testmod.c
And the testcases passed:
./test_progs -t fexit Summary: 5/12 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
./test_progs -t fentry Summary: 3/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
Reviewed-by: Jiang Biao benbjiang@tencent.com Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong imagedong@tencent.com
v3:
- move bpf_fentry_test{7,12} to bpf_testmod.c and rename them to bpf_testmod_fentry_test{7,12} meanwhile
- get return value by bpf_get_func_ret() in "fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12", as we don't change ___bpf_ctx_cast() in this version
.../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 19 ++++++++++- .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c | 4 ++- .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_test.c | 2 ++ .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_test.c | 2 ++ .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c | 21 ++++++++++++ .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++ 6 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c index cf216041876c..66615fdbe3df 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c @@ -191,6 +191,19 @@ noinline int bpf_testmod_fentry_test3(char a, int b, u64 c) return a + b + c; } +noinline int bpf_testmod_fentry_test7(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d,
void *e, u64 f, u64 g)+{
- return a + (long)b + c + d + (long)e + f + g;
+}
+noinline int bpf_testmod_fentry_test12(u64 a, void *b, short c, int d,
void *e, u64 f, u64 g, u64 h,u64 i, u64 j, u64 k, u64 l)
Please switch args to a combination of u8,u16,u32,u64. u64 only args might hide bugs.