diff mbox series

[RFC,bpf-next,5/5] selftests/bpf: don't match exact insn index in expected error message

Message ID 20221231163122.1360813-6-eddyz87@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State RFC
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series Support for BPF_ST instruction in LLVM C compiler | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR pending PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for build for x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for llvm-toolchain
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for build for aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 pending Logs for test_maps on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for test_maps on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 fail Logs for test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 fail Logs for test_progs on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 fail Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 fail Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-30 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-32 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-33 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-34 success Logs for test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-35 success Logs for test_verifier on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-36 success Logs for test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-37 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-38 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/subject_prefix success Link
netdev/cover_letter success Series has a cover letter
netdev/patch_count success Link
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 11 maintainers not CCed: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org kpsingh@kernel.org haoluo@google.com memxor@gmail.com song@kernel.org martin.lau@linux.dev sdf@google.com john.fastabend@gmail.com shuah@kernel.org jolsa@kernel.org mykolal@fb.com
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/check_selftest success No net selftest shell script
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/checkpatch warning WARNING: quoted string split across lines
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-31 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 fail Logs for test_progs on s390x with gcc

Commit Message

Eduard Zingerman Dec. 31, 2022, 4:31 p.m. UTC 
Depending on the behavior of the C compiler statements like below
could be translated as 1 or 2 instructions:

  C:  int credit = 0;

BPF:  *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = 0

      - or -

      r1 = 0
      *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r1

This commit relaxes expected error messages for a few tests to avoid
matching exact instruction number.

Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/log_fixup.c | 2 +-
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/spin_lock.c | 8 ++++----
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/log_fixup.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/log_fixup.c
index f4ffdcabf4e4..760bd3155ea2 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/log_fixup.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/log_fixup.c
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@  static void missing_map(void)
 	ASSERT_FALSE(bpf_map__autocreate(skel->maps.missing_map), "missing_map_autocreate");
 
 	ASSERT_HAS_SUBSTR(log_buf,
-			  "8: <invalid BPF map reference>\n"
+			  ": <invalid BPF map reference>\n"
 			  "BPF map 'missing_map' is referenced but wasn't created\n",
 			  "log_buf");
 
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/spin_lock.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/spin_lock.c
index d9270bd3d920..1bdb99b588f0 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/spin_lock.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/spin_lock.c
@@ -19,12 +19,12 @@  static struct {
 	  "; R1_w=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=4,imm=0)\n2: (85) call bpf_this_cpu_ptr#154\n"
 	  "R1 type=map_value expected=percpu_ptr_" },
 	{ "lock_id_mapval_preserve",
-	  "8: (bf) r1 = r0                       ; R0_w=map_value(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) "
-	  "R1_w=map_value(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0)\n9: (85) call bpf_this_cpu_ptr#154\n"
+	  ": (bf) r1 = r0                       ; R0_w=map_value(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) "
+	  "R1_w=map_value(id=1,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0)\n8: (85) call bpf_this_cpu_ptr#154\n"
 	  "R1 type=map_value expected=percpu_ptr_" },
 	{ "lock_id_innermapval_preserve",
-	  "13: (bf) r1 = r0                      ; R0=map_value(id=2,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) "
-	  "R1_w=map_value(id=2,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0)\n14: (85) call bpf_this_cpu_ptr#154\n"
+	  ": (bf) r1 = r0                      ; R0=map_value(id=2,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0) "
+	  "R1_w=map_value(id=2,off=0,ks=4,vs=8,imm=0)\n13: (85) call bpf_this_cpu_ptr#154\n"
 	  "R1 type=map_value expected=percpu_ptr_" },
 	{ "lock_id_mismatch_kptr_kptr", "bpf_spin_unlock of different lock" },
 	{ "lock_id_mismatch_kptr_global", "bpf_spin_unlock of different lock" },