1. Patchew
  2. linux
  3. [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/3] Add prog_kfunc feature probe
  4. View patch

[PATCH bpf-next v3 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc API selftests

Tao Chen posted 3 patches 1 year ago
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH bpf-next v3 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc API selftests
Posted by Tao Chen 1 year ago 
Add selftests for prog_kfunc feature probing.
 ./test_progs -t libbpf_probe_kfuncs
 #153     libbpf_probe_kfuncs:OK
 Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED

Signed-off-by: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@gmail.com>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c  | 35 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
index 4ed46ed58a7b..d9d69941f694 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
@@ -126,3 +126,38 @@ void test_libbpf_probe_helpers(void)
 		ASSERT_EQ(res, d->supported, buf);
 	}
 }
+
+void test_libbpf_probe_kfuncs(void)
+{
+	int ret, kfunc_id;
+	char *kfunc = "bpf_cpumask_create";
+	struct btf *btf;
+
+	btf = btf__parse("/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux", NULL);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(btf, "btf_parse"))
+		return;
+
+	kfunc_id = btf__find_by_name_kind(btf, kfunc, BTF_KIND_FUNC);
+	if (!ASSERT_GT(kfunc_id, 0, kfunc))
+		goto cleanup;
+
+	/* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL supports kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
+	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
+	ASSERT_EQ(ret, 1, kfunc);
+
+	/* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE does not support kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
+	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
+	ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, kfunc);
+
+	/* invalid kfunc id */
+	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, -1, 0, NULL);
+	ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, "invalid kfunc id:-1");
+
+	/* invalid prog type */
+	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(100000, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
+	if (!ASSERT_LE(ret, 0, "invalid prog type:100000"))
+		goto cleanup;
+
+cleanup:
+	btf__free(btf);
+}
-- 
2.43.0
Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc API selftests
Posted by Andrii Nakryiko 1 year ago 
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 6:44 AM Tao Chen <chen.dylane@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Add selftests for prog_kfunc feature probing.
>  ./test_progs -t libbpf_probe_kfuncs
>  #153     libbpf_probe_kfuncs:OK
>  Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>
> Signed-off-by: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@gmail.com>
> ---
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c  | 35 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
> index 4ed46ed58a7b..d9d69941f694 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
> @@ -126,3 +126,38 @@ void test_libbpf_probe_helpers(void)
>                 ASSERT_EQ(res, d->supported, buf);
>         }
>  }
> +
> +void test_libbpf_probe_kfuncs(void)
> +{
> +       int ret, kfunc_id;
> +       char *kfunc = "bpf_cpumask_create";
> +       struct btf *btf;
> +
> +       btf = btf__parse("/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux", NULL);
> +       if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(btf, "btf_parse"))
> +               return;
> +
> +       kfunc_id = btf__find_by_name_kind(btf, kfunc, BTF_KIND_FUNC);
> +       if (!ASSERT_GT(kfunc_id, 0, kfunc))
> +               goto cleanup;
> +
> +       /* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL supports kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
> +       ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
> +       ASSERT_EQ(ret, 1, kfunc);
> +
> +       /* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE does not support kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
> +       ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
> +       ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, kfunc);
> +
> +       /* invalid kfunc id */
> +       ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, -1, 0, NULL);
> +       ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, "invalid kfunc id:-1");
> +
> +       /* invalid prog type */
> +       ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(100000, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
> +       if (!ASSERT_LE(ret, 0, "invalid prog type:100000"))

we have ASSERT_ERR(), wouldn't it work here?


let's also add a test for kfunc in module (we have bpf_testmod, we
should be able to test something out of there)

> +               goto cleanup;
> +
> +cleanup:
> +       btf__free(btf);
> +}
> --
> 2.43.0
>
Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc API selftests
Posted by Tao Chen 1 year ago 
在 2025/1/25 02:48, Andrii Nakryiko 写道:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 6:44 AM Tao Chen <chen.dylane@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Add selftests for prog_kfunc feature probing.
>>   ./test_progs -t libbpf_probe_kfuncs
>>   #153     libbpf_probe_kfuncs:OK
>>   Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c  | 35 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
>> index 4ed46ed58a7b..d9d69941f694 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
>> @@ -126,3 +126,38 @@ void test_libbpf_probe_helpers(void)
>>                  ASSERT_EQ(res, d->supported, buf);
>>          }
>>   }
>> +
>> +void test_libbpf_probe_kfuncs(void)
>> +{
>> +       int ret, kfunc_id;
>> +       char *kfunc = "bpf_cpumask_create";
>> +       struct btf *btf;
>> +
>> +       btf = btf__parse("/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux", NULL);
>> +       if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(btf, "btf_parse"))
>> +               return;
>> +
>> +       kfunc_id = btf__find_by_name_kind(btf, kfunc, BTF_KIND_FUNC);
>> +       if (!ASSERT_GT(kfunc_id, 0, kfunc))
>> +               goto cleanup;
>> +
>> +       /* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL supports kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
>> +       ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
>> +       ASSERT_EQ(ret, 1, kfunc);
>> +
>> +       /* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE does not support kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
>> +       ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
>> +       ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, kfunc);
>> +
>> +       /* invalid kfunc id */
>> +       ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, -1, 0, NULL);
>> +       ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, "invalid kfunc id:-1");
>> +
>> +       /* invalid prog type */
>> +       ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(100000, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
>> +       if (!ASSERT_LE(ret, 0, "invalid prog type:100000"))
> 
> we have ASSERT_ERR(), wouldn't it work here?
> 
> 
> let's also add a test for kfunc in module (we have bpf_testmod, we
> should be able to test something out of there)

Ok, i will add it in v4.

> 
>> +               goto cleanup;
>> +
>> +cleanup:
>> +       btf__free(btf);
>> +}
>> --
>> 2.43.0
>>


-- 
Best Regards
Dylane Chen
Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc API selftests
Posted by Jiri Olsa 1 year ago 
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:44:11PM +0800, Tao Chen wrote:
> Add selftests for prog_kfunc feature probing.
>  ./test_progs -t libbpf_probe_kfuncs
>  #153     libbpf_probe_kfuncs:OK
>  Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@gmail.com>
> ---
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c  | 35 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
> index 4ed46ed58a7b..d9d69941f694 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
> @@ -126,3 +126,38 @@ void test_libbpf_probe_helpers(void)
>  		ASSERT_EQ(res, d->supported, buf);
>  	}
>  }
> +
> +void test_libbpf_probe_kfuncs(void)
> +{
> +	int ret, kfunc_id;
> +	char *kfunc = "bpf_cpumask_create";
> +	struct btf *btf;
> +
> +	btf = btf__parse("/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux", NULL);
> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(btf, "btf_parse"))
> +		return;
> +
> +	kfunc_id = btf__find_by_name_kind(btf, kfunc, BTF_KIND_FUNC);
> +	if (!ASSERT_GT(kfunc_id, 0, kfunc))
> +		goto cleanup;
> +
> +	/* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL supports kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
> +	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
> +	ASSERT_EQ(ret, 1, kfunc);
> +
> +	/* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE does not support kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
> +	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
> +	ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, kfunc);
> +
> +	/* invalid kfunc id */
> +	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, -1, 0, NULL);
> +	ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, "invalid kfunc id:-1");
> +
> +	/* invalid prog type */
> +	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(100000, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
> +	if (!ASSERT_LE(ret, 0, "invalid prog type:100000"))
> +		goto cleanup;

nit no need for the goto

jirka

> +
> +cleanup:
> +	btf__free(btf);
> +}
> -- 
> 2.43.0
>
Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc API selftests
Posted by Tao Chen 1 year ago 
在 2025/1/25 00:27, Jiri Olsa 写道:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:44:11PM +0800, Tao Chen wrote:
>> Add selftests for prog_kfunc feature probing.
>>   ./test_progs -t libbpf_probe_kfuncs
>>   #153     libbpf_probe_kfuncs:OK
>>   Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c  | 35 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
>> index 4ed46ed58a7b..d9d69941f694 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/libbpf_probes.c
>> @@ -126,3 +126,38 @@ void test_libbpf_probe_helpers(void)
>>   		ASSERT_EQ(res, d->supported, buf);
>>   	}
>>   }
>> +
>> +void test_libbpf_probe_kfuncs(void)
>> +{
>> +	int ret, kfunc_id;
>> +	char *kfunc = "bpf_cpumask_create";
>> +	struct btf *btf;
>> +
>> +	btf = btf__parse("/sys/kernel/btf/vmlinux", NULL);
>> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(btf, "btf_parse"))
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	kfunc_id = btf__find_by_name_kind(btf, kfunc, BTF_KIND_FUNC);
>> +	if (!ASSERT_GT(kfunc_id, 0, kfunc))
>> +		goto cleanup;
>> +
>> +	/* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL supports kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
>> +	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
>> +	ASSERT_EQ(ret, 1, kfunc);
>> +
>> +	/* prog BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE does not support kfunc bpf_cpumask_create */
>> +	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
>> +	ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, kfunc);
>> +
>> +	/* invalid kfunc id */
>> +	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, -1, 0, NULL);
>> +	ASSERT_EQ(ret, 0, "invalid kfunc id:-1");
>> +
>> +	/* invalid prog type */
>> +	ret = libbpf_probe_bpf_kfunc(100000, kfunc_id, 0, NULL);
>> +	if (!ASSERT_LE(ret, 0, "invalid prog type:100000"))
>> +		goto cleanup;
> 
> nit no need for the goto
> 
> jirka
> 

Ack. Will fix.

>> +
>> +cleanup:
>> +	btf__free(btf);
>> +}
>> -- 
>> 2.43.0
>>


-- 
Best Regards
Dylane Chen

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.