1. Patchew
  2. MPTCP
  3. [PATCH mptcp-next v6 0/9] refactor mptcp bpf tests
  4. View patch

[PATCH mptcp-next v6 4/9] selftests/bpf: Add MPTCP_SCHED_TEST macro

Geliang Tang posted 9 patches 1 year, 10 months ago
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH mptcp-next v6 4/9] selftests/bpf: Add MPTCP_SCHED_TEST macro
Posted by Geliang Tang 1 year, 10 months ago 
From: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>

This patch defines MPTCP_SCHED_TEST macro, a template for all scheduler
tests. Every scheduler is identified by argument name, and use sysctl
to set net.mptcp.scheduler as "bpf_name" to use this sched. Add two
veth net devices to simulate the multiple addresses case. Use 'ip mptcp
endpoint' command to add the new endpoint ADDR2 to PM netlink. Arguments
addr1/add2 means whether the data has been sent on the first/second subflow
or not. Send data and check bytes_sent of 'ss' output after it using
send_data_and_verify().

Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
---
 .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c  | 30 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
index ffcd5ebe38b9..8a6b09a97698 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
@@ -498,6 +498,36 @@ static void test_default(void)
 	cleanup_netns(nstoken);
 }
 
+#define MPTCP_SCHED_TEST(name, addr1, addr2)			\
+static void test_##name(void)					\
+{								\
+	struct mptcp_bpf_##name *skel;				\
+	struct nstoken *nstoken;				\
+	struct bpf_link *link;					\
+	struct bpf_map *map;					\
+								\
+	skel = mptcp_bpf_##name##__open_and_load();		\
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "open_and_load " #name))	\
+		return;						\
+								\
+	map = bpf_object__find_map_by_name(skel->obj, #name);	\
+	link = bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(map);			\
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_struct_ops " #name))	\
+		goto skel_destroy;				\
+								\
+	nstoken = sched_init("subflow", "bpf_" #name);		\
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(nstoken, "sched_init " #name))	\
+		goto link_destroy;				\
+								\
+	send_data_and_verify(#name, atoi(#addr1), atoi(#addr2));\
+								\
+	cleanup_netns(nstoken);					\
+link_destroy:							\
+	bpf_link__destroy(link);				\
+skel_destroy:							\
+	mptcp_bpf_##name##__destroy(skel);			\
+}
+
 static void test_first(void)
 {
 	struct mptcp_bpf_first *first_skel;
-- 
2.40.1
Re: [PATCH mptcp-next v6 4/9] selftests/bpf: Add MPTCP_SCHED_TEST macro
Posted by Matthieu Baerts 1 year, 10 months ago 
Hi Geliang,

On 04/04/2024 15:03, Geliang Tang wrote:
> From: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
> 
> This patch defines MPTCP_SCHED_TEST macro, a template for all scheduler
> tests. Every scheduler is identified by argument name, and use sysctl
> to set net.mptcp.scheduler as "bpf_name" to use this sched. Add two
> veth net devices to simulate the multiple addresses case. Use 'ip mptcp
> endpoint' command to add the new endpoint ADDR2 to PM netlink. Arguments
> addr1/add2 means whether the data has been sent on the first/second subflow
> or not. Send data and check bytes_sent of 'ss' output after it using
> send_data_and_verify().

Should we not squash this in "selftests/bpf: Add bpf scheduler test" as
well? We already have a lot of different commits.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
> ---
>  .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c  | 30 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
> index ffcd5ebe38b9..8a6b09a97698 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
> @@ -498,6 +498,36 @@ static void test_default(void)
>  	cleanup_netns(nstoken);
>  }
>  
> +#define MPTCP_SCHED_TEST(name, addr1, addr2)			\
> +static void test_##name(void)					\
> +{								\
> +	struct mptcp_bpf_##name *skel;				\
> +	struct nstoken *nstoken;				\
> +	struct bpf_link *link;					\
> +	struct bpf_map *map;					\
> +								\
> +	skel = mptcp_bpf_##name##__open_and_load();		\
> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "open_and_load " #name))	\
> +		return;						\
> +								\
> +	map = bpf_object__find_map_by_name(skel->obj, #name);	\
> +	link = bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(map);			\
> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_struct_ops " #name))	\
> +		goto skel_destroy;				\
> +								\
> +	nstoken = sched_init("subflow", "bpf_" #name);		\
> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(nstoken, "sched_init " #name))	\
> +		goto link_destroy;				\
> +								\
> +	send_data_and_verify(#name, atoi(#addr1), atoi(#addr2));\

Can you not use the values of addr1 and addr2 directly as number instead
of string + atoi()?

> +								\
> +	cleanup_netns(nstoken);					\
> +link_destroy:							\
> +	bpf_link__destroy(link);				\
> +skel_destroy:							\
> +	mptcp_bpf_##name##__destroy(skel);			\
> +}

I don't mind having functions defined in macros, but I think we should
try to reduce their size to the minimum (if possible) because they are
hard to read and debug in case of error.

Here, do you think we could have a smaller macro passing the name as a
string (for the error messages) and the different functions pointers you
need to a new helper? (+ using generic skel structure?)

Maybe it will not work or will not be easier to read, but worth a try I
think. If it is not possible, please explain why.


> +
>  static void test_first(void)
>  {
>  	struct mptcp_bpf_first *first_skel;

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.
Re: [PATCH mptcp-next v6 4/9] selftests/bpf: Add MPTCP_SCHED_TEST macro
Posted by Geliang Tang 1 year, 10 months ago 
Hi Matt,

On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 19:52 +0200, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Hi Geliang,
> 
> On 04/04/2024 15:03, Geliang Tang wrote:
> > From: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
> > 
> > This patch defines MPTCP_SCHED_TEST macro, a template for all
> > scheduler
> > tests. Every scheduler is identified by argument name, and use
> > sysctl
> > to set net.mptcp.scheduler as "bpf_name" to use this sched. Add two
> > veth net devices to simulate the multiple addresses case. Use 'ip
> > mptcp
> > endpoint' command to add the new endpoint ADDR2 to PM netlink.
> > Arguments
> > addr1/add2 means whether the data has been sent on the first/second
> > subflow
> > or not. Send data and check bytes_sent of 'ss' output after it
> > using
> > send_data_and_verify().
> 
> Should we not squash this in "selftests/bpf: Add bpf scheduler test"
> as
> well? We already have a lot of different commits.
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
> > ---
> >  .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c  | 30
> > +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
> > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
> > index ffcd5ebe38b9..8a6b09a97698 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
> > @@ -498,6 +498,36 @@ static void test_default(void)
> >  	cleanup_netns(nstoken);
> >  }
> >  
> > +#define MPTCP_SCHED_TEST(name, addr1, addr2)			\
> > +static void test_##name(void)					\
> > +{								\
> > +	struct mptcp_bpf_##name *skel;				\
> > +	struct nstoken *nstoken;				\
> > +	struct bpf_link *link;					\
> > +	struct bpf_map *map;					\
> > +								\
> > +	skel = mptcp_bpf_##name##__open_and_load();		\
> > +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "open_and_load " #name))	\
> > +		return;					
> > 	\
> > +								\
> > +	map = bpf_object__find_map_by_name(skel->obj, #name);	\
> > +	link =
> > bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(map);			\
> > +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_struct_ops " #name))	\
> > +		goto skel_destroy;				\
> > +								\
> > +	nstoken = sched_init("subflow", "bpf_" #name);		\
> > +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(nstoken, "sched_init " #name))	\
> > +		goto link_destroy;				\
> > +								\
> > +	send_data_and_verify(#name, atoi(#addr1), atoi(#addr2));\
> 
> Can you not use the values of addr1 and addr2 directly as number
> instead
> of string + atoi()?
> 
> > +								\
> > +	cleanup_netns(nstoken);				
> > 	\
> > +link_destroy:							\
> > +	bpf_link__destroy(link);				\
> > +skel_destroy:							\
> > +	mptcp_bpf_##name##__destroy(skel);			\
> > +}
> 
> I don't mind having functions defined in macros, but I think we
> should
> try to reduce their size to the minimum (if possible) because they
> are
> hard to read and debug in case of error.
> 
> Here, do you think we could have a smaller macro passing the name as
> a
> string (for the error messages) and the different functions pointers
> you
> need to a new helper? (+ using generic skel structure?)

Thanks for your review, it's very useful. v7 is sent, address all your
comments except this one. I didn't got it, please give me more details
about this.

-Geliang

> 
> Maybe it will not work or will not be easier to read, but worth a try
> I
> think. If it is not possible, please explain why.
> 
> 
> > +
> >  static void test_first(void)
> >  {
> >  	struct mptcp_bpf_first *first_skel;
> 
> Cheers,
> Matt
Re: [PATCH mptcp-next v6 4/9] selftests/bpf: Add MPTCP_SCHED_TEST macro
Posted by Matthieu Baerts 1 year, 10 months ago 
Hi Geliang, Mat,

On 08/04/2024 05:10, Geliang Tang wrote:
> Hi Matt,
> 
> On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 19:52 +0200, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>> Hi Geliang,
>>
>> On 04/04/2024 15:03, Geliang Tang wrote:
>>> From: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
>>>
>>> This patch defines MPTCP_SCHED_TEST macro, a template for all
>>> scheduler
>>> tests. Every scheduler is identified by argument name, and use
>>> sysctl
>>> to set net.mptcp.scheduler as "bpf_name" to use this sched. Add two
>>> veth net devices to simulate the multiple addresses case. Use 'ip
>>> mptcp
>>> endpoint' command to add the new endpoint ADDR2 to PM netlink.
>>> Arguments
>>> addr1/add2 means whether the data has been sent on the first/second
>>> subflow
>>> or not. Send data and check bytes_sent of 'ss' output after it
>>> using
>>> send_data_and_verify().
>>
>> Should we not squash this in "selftests/bpf: Add bpf scheduler test"
>> as
>> well? We already have a lot of different commits.
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
>>> ---
>>>  .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c  | 30
>>> +++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
>>> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
>>> index ffcd5ebe38b9..8a6b09a97698 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/mptcp.c
>>> @@ -498,6 +498,36 @@ static void test_default(void)
>>>  	cleanup_netns(nstoken);
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +#define MPTCP_SCHED_TEST(name, addr1, addr2)			\
>>> +static void test_##name(void)					\
>>> +{								\
>>> +	struct mptcp_bpf_##name *skel;				\
>>> +	struct nstoken *nstoken;				\
>>> +	struct bpf_link *link;					\
>>> +	struct bpf_map *map;					\
>>> +								\
>>> +	skel = mptcp_bpf_##name##__open_and_load();		\
>>> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "open_and_load " #name))	\
>>> +		return;					
>>> 	\
>>> +								\
>>> +	map = bpf_object__find_map_by_name(skel->obj, #name);	\
>>> +	link =
>>> bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(map);			\
>>> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_struct_ops " #name))	\
>>> +		goto skel_destroy;				\
>>> +								\
>>> +	nstoken = sched_init("subflow", "bpf_" #name);		\
>>> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(nstoken, "sched_init " #name))	\
>>> +		goto link_destroy;				\
>>> +								\
>>> +	send_data_and_verify(#name, atoi(#addr1), atoi(#addr2));\
>>
>> Can you not use the values of addr1 and addr2 directly as number
>> instead
>> of string + atoi()?
>>
>>> +								\
>>> +	cleanup_netns(nstoken);				
>>> 	\
>>> +link_destroy:							\
>>> +	bpf_link__destroy(link);				\
>>> +skel_destroy:							\
>>> +	mptcp_bpf_##name##__destroy(skel);			\
>>> +}
>>
>> I don't mind having functions defined in macros, but I think we
>> should
>> try to reduce their size to the minimum (if possible) because they
>> are
>> hard to read and debug in case of error.
>>
>> Here, do you think we could have a smaller macro passing the name as
>> a
>> string (for the error messages) and the different functions pointers
>> you
>> need to a new helper? (+ using generic skel structure?)
> 
> Thanks for your review, it's very useful. v7 is sent, address all your
> comments except this one. I didn't got it, please give me more details
> about this.
My comment was similar to the one from Mat:

https://lore.kernel.org/mptcp/f9daffc3-c1a6-0ec3-f821-107ab97f551c@kernel.org/

In short: macros can be hard to debug.


I also see why you are using a macro here, all these functions are very
similar. Here, there are more functions that can "reduced", so maybe
that's OK?

@Mat: what do you think? Or maybe another idea?

(Or maybe it is possible to have a "small" macro, passing function
pointers to a (proper) helper? But not sure if it is less complex. And
maybe not worth it for the tests.)

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.