diff mbox series

[bpf-next,v4,3/3] selftests/bpf: add testcase for FENTRY/FEXIT with 6+ arguments

Message ID 20230609095653.1406173-4-imagedong@tencent.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series bpf, x86: allow function arguments up to 12 for TRACING | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR fail merge-conflict
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/apply fail Patch does not apply to bpf-next
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-3 success Logs for build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for build for x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for test_maps on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 fail Logs for test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 fail Logs for test_progs on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 success Logs for test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for veristat

Commit Message

Menglong Dong June 9, 2023, 9:56 a.m. UTC 
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

Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@tencent.com>
---
v4:
- use different type for args in bpf_testmod_fentry_test{7,12}
- add testcase for grabage values in ctx
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 | 33 +++++++++++
 .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c  | 57 +++++++++++++++++++
 6 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Yonghong Song June 10, 2023, 3:29 a.m. UTC | #1 
On 6/9/23 2:56 AM, 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
> 
> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@tencent.com>
> ---
> v4:
> - use different type for args in bpf_testmod_fentry_test{7,12}
> - add testcase for grabage values in ctx
> 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 | 33 +++++++++++
>   .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c  | 57 +++++++++++++++++++
>   6 files changed, 115 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)
> +{
> +	return a + (long)b + c + d + (long)e + f + g + h + i + j + k + l;
> +}

It would be great to add a couple cases with struct arguments
where each struct has 8 < struct_size <= 16.
>   __diag_pop();
>   
>   int bpf_testmod_fentry_ok;
> @@ -245,7 +258,11 @@ bpf_testmod_test_read(struct file *file, struct kobject *kobj,
>   
>   	if (bpf_testmod_fentry_test1(1) != 2 ||
>   	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test2(2, 3) != 5 ||
> -	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test3(4, 5, 6) != 15)
> +	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test3(4, 5, 6) != 15 ||
> +	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test7(16, (void *)17, 18, 19, (void *)20,
> +				     21, 22) != 133 ||
> +	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test12(16, (void *)17, 18, 19, (void *)20,
> +				      21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27) != 258)
>   		goto out;
>   
>   	bpf_testmod_fentry_ok = 1;
[...]
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c
> index 8f1ccb7302e1..a6d8e03ff5b7 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c
> @@ -78,3 +78,60 @@ int BPF_PROG(test8, struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
>   		test8_result = 1;
>   	return 0;
>   }
> +
> +__u64 test9_result = 0;
> +SEC("fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test7")
> +int BPF_PROG(test9, __u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, char f,
> +	     int g, int ret)
> +{
> +	test9_result = a == 16 && b == (void *)17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
> +		e == (void *)20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && ret == 133;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +__u64 test10_result = 0;
> +SEC("fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12")
> +int BPF_PROG(test10, __u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, char f,
> +	     int g, unsigned int h, long i, __u64 j, unsigned long k,
> +	     unsigned char l)
> +{
> +	__u64 ret;
> +	int err;
> +
> +	/* BPF_PROG() don't support 14 arguments, and ctx[12] can't be
> +	 * accessed yet. So we get the return value by bpf_get_func_ret()
> +	 * for now.
> +	 */
> +	err = bpf_get_func_ret(ctx, &ret);

Maybe just have 11 arguments for this test case?

> +	if (err)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	test10_result = a == 16 && b == (void *)17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
> +		e == (void *)20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && h == 23 &&
> +		i == 24 && j == 25 && k == 26 && l == 27 &&
> +		(int)ret == 258;
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +__u64 test11_result = 0;
> +SEC("fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12")
> +int BPF_PROG(test11, __u64 a, __u64 b, __u64 c, __u64 d, __u64 e, __u64 f,
> +	     __u64 g, __u64 h, __u64 i, __u64 j, __u64 k, __u64 l)
> +{
> +	__u64 ret;
> +	int err;
> +
> +	/* BPF_PROG() don't support 14 arguments, and ctx[12] can't be
> +	 * accessed yet. So we get the return value by bpf_get_func_ret()
> +	 * for now.
> +	 */
> +	err = bpf_get_func_ret(ctx, &ret);
> +	if (err)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	test11_result = a == 16 && b == 17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
> +		e == 20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && h == 23 &&
> +		i == 24 && j == 25 && k == 26 && l == 27 &&
> +		ret == 258;
> +	return 0;
> +}
Menglong Dong June 10, 2023, 7:01 a.m. UTC | #2 
On Sat, Jun 10, 2023 at 11:29 AM Yonghong Song <yhs@meta.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/9/23 2:56 AM, 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
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@tencent.com>
> > ---
> > v4:
> > - use different type for args in bpf_testmod_fentry_test{7,12}
> > - add testcase for grabage values in ctx
> > 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 | 33 +++++++++++
> >   .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c  | 57 +++++++++++++++++++
> >   6 files changed, 115 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)
> > +{
> > +     return a + (long)b + c + d + (long)e + f + g + h + i + j + k + l;
> > +}
>
> It would be great to add a couple cases with struct arguments
> where each struct has 8 < struct_size <= 16.

Good idea. And I'll add extra test cases for the case
you mentioned before.

> >   __diag_pop();
> >
> >   int bpf_testmod_fentry_ok;
> > @@ -245,7 +258,11 @@ bpf_testmod_test_read(struct file *file, struct kobject *kobj,
> >
> >       if (bpf_testmod_fentry_test1(1) != 2 ||
> >           bpf_testmod_fentry_test2(2, 3) != 5 ||
> > -         bpf_testmod_fentry_test3(4, 5, 6) != 15)
> > +         bpf_testmod_fentry_test3(4, 5, 6) != 15 ||
> > +         bpf_testmod_fentry_test7(16, (void *)17, 18, 19, (void *)20,
> > +                                  21, 22) != 133 ||
> > +         bpf_testmod_fentry_test12(16, (void *)17, 18, 19, (void *)20,
> > +                                   21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27) != 258)
> >               goto out;
> >
> >       bpf_testmod_fentry_ok = 1;
> [...]
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c
> > index 8f1ccb7302e1..a6d8e03ff5b7 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c
> > @@ -78,3 +78,60 @@ int BPF_PROG(test8, struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
> >               test8_result = 1;
> >       return 0;
> >   }
> > +
> > +__u64 test9_result = 0;
> > +SEC("fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test7")
> > +int BPF_PROG(test9, __u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, char f,
> > +          int g, int ret)
> > +{
> > +     test9_result = a == 16 && b == (void *)17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
> > +             e == (void *)20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && ret == 133;
> > +     return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +__u64 test10_result = 0;
> > +SEC("fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12")
> > +int BPF_PROG(test10, __u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, char f,
> > +          int g, unsigned int h, long i, __u64 j, unsigned long k,
> > +          unsigned char l)
> > +{
> > +     __u64 ret;
> > +     int err;
> > +
> > +     /* BPF_PROG() don't support 14 arguments, and ctx[12] can't be
> > +      * accessed yet. So we get the return value by bpf_get_func_ret()
> > +      * for now.
> > +      */
> > +     err = bpf_get_func_ret(ctx, &ret);
>
> Maybe just have 11 arguments for this test case?
>
> > +     if (err)
> > +             return 0;
> > +
> > +     test10_result = a == 16 && b == (void *)17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
> > +             e == (void *)20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && h == 23 &&
> > +             i == 24 && j == 25 && k == 26 && l == 27 &&
> > +             (int)ret == 258;
> > +     return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +__u64 test11_result = 0;
> > +SEC("fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12")
> > +int BPF_PROG(test11, __u64 a, __u64 b, __u64 c, __u64 d, __u64 e, __u64 f,
> > +          __u64 g, __u64 h, __u64 i, __u64 j, __u64 k, __u64 l)
> > +{
> > +     __u64 ret;
> > +     int err;
> > +
> > +     /* BPF_PROG() don't support 14 arguments, and ctx[12] can't be
> > +      * accessed yet. So we get the return value by bpf_get_func_ret()
> > +      * for now.
> > +      */
> > +     err = bpf_get_func_ret(ctx, &ret);
> > +     if (err)
> > +             return 0;
> > +
> > +     test11_result = a == 16 && b == 17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
> > +             e == 20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && h == 23 &&
> > +             i == 24 && j == 25 && k == 26 && l == 27 &&
> > +             ret == 258;
> > +     return 0;
> > +}
diff mbox series

Patch

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)
+{
+	return a + (long)b + c + d + (long)e + f + g + h + i + j + k + l;
+}
+
 __diag_pop();
 
 int bpf_testmod_fentry_ok;
@@ -245,7 +258,11 @@  bpf_testmod_test_read(struct file *file, struct kobject *kobj,
 
 	if (bpf_testmod_fentry_test1(1) != 2 ||
 	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test2(2, 3) != 5 ||
-	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test3(4, 5, 6) != 15)
+	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test3(4, 5, 6) != 15 ||
+	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test7(16, (void *)17, 18, 19, (void *)20,
+				     21, 22) != 133 ||
+	    bpf_testmod_fentry_test12(16, (void *)17, 18, 19, (void *)20,
+				      21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27) != 258)
 		goto out;
 
 	bpf_testmod_fentry_ok = 1;
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c
index 130f5b82d2e6..0078acee0ede 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c
@@ -31,10 +31,12 @@  void test_fentry_fexit(void)
 	ASSERT_OK(err, "ipv6 test_run");
 	ASSERT_OK(topts.retval, "ipv6 test retval");
 
+	ASSERT_OK(trigger_module_test_read(1), "trigger_read");
+
 	fentry_res = (__u64 *)fentry_skel->bss;
 	fexit_res = (__u64 *)fexit_skel->bss;
 	printf("%lld\n", fentry_skel->bss->test1_result);
-	for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
+	for (i = 0; i < 11; i++) {
 		ASSERT_EQ(fentry_res[i], 1, "fentry result");
 		ASSERT_EQ(fexit_res[i], 1, "fexit result");
 	}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_test.c
index c0d1d61d5f66..e1c0ce40febf 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_test.c
@@ -24,6 +24,8 @@  static int fentry_test(struct fentry_test_lskel *fentry_skel)
 	ASSERT_OK(err, "test_run");
 	ASSERT_EQ(topts.retval, 0, "test_run");
 
+	ASSERT_OK(trigger_module_test_read(1), "trigger_read");
+
 	result = (__u64 *)fentry_skel->bss;
 	for (i = 0; i < sizeof(*fentry_skel->bss) / sizeof(__u64); i++) {
 		if (!ASSERT_EQ(result[i], 1, "fentry_result"))
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_test.c
index 101b7343036b..ea81fa913ec6 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fexit_test.c
@@ -24,6 +24,8 @@  static int fexit_test(struct fexit_test_lskel *fexit_skel)
 	ASSERT_OK(err, "test_run");
 	ASSERT_EQ(topts.retval, 0, "test_run");
 
+	ASSERT_OK(trigger_module_test_read(1), "trigger_read");
+
 	result = (__u64 *)fexit_skel->bss;
 	for (i = 0; i < sizeof(*fexit_skel->bss) / sizeof(__u64); i++) {
 		if (!ASSERT_EQ(result[i], 1, "fexit_result"))
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c
index 52a550d281d9..91dbf63b3ba1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c
@@ -77,3 +77,36 @@  int BPF_PROG(test8, struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
 		test8_result = 1;
 	return 0;
 }
+
+__u64 test9_result = 0;
+SEC("fentry/bpf_testmod_fentry_test7")
+int BPF_PROG(test9, __u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, char f,
+	     int g)
+{
+	test9_result = a == 16 && b == (void *)17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
+		e == (void *)20 && f == 21 && g == 22;
+	return 0;
+}
+
+__u64 test10_result = 0;
+SEC("fentry/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12")
+int BPF_PROG(test10, __u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, char f,
+	     int g, unsigned int h, long i, __u64 j, unsigned long k,
+	     unsigned char l)
+{
+	test10_result = a == 16 && b == (void *)17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
+		e == (void *)20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && h == 23 &&
+		i == 24 && j == 25 && k == 26 && l == 27;
+	return 0;
+}
+
+__u64 test11_result = 0;
+SEC("fentry/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12")
+int BPF_PROG(test11, __u64 a, __u64 b, __u64 c, __u64 d, __u64 e, __u64 f,
+	     __u64 g, __u64 h, __u64 i, __u64 j, __u64 k, __u64 l)
+{
+	test11_result = a == 16 && b == 17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
+		e == 20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && h == 23 &&
+		i == 24 && j == 25 && k == 26 && l == 27;
+	return 0;
+}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c
index 8f1ccb7302e1..a6d8e03ff5b7 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c
@@ -78,3 +78,60 @@  int BPF_PROG(test8, struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
 		test8_result = 1;
 	return 0;
 }
+
+__u64 test9_result = 0;
+SEC("fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test7")
+int BPF_PROG(test9, __u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, char f,
+	     int g, int ret)
+{
+	test9_result = a == 16 && b == (void *)17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
+		e == (void *)20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && ret == 133;
+	return 0;
+}
+
+__u64 test10_result = 0;
+SEC("fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12")
+int BPF_PROG(test10, __u64 a, void *b, short c, int d, void *e, char f,
+	     int g, unsigned int h, long i, __u64 j, unsigned long k,
+	     unsigned char l)
+{
+	__u64 ret;
+	int err;
+
+	/* BPF_PROG() don't support 14 arguments, and ctx[12] can't be
+	 * accessed yet. So we get the return value by bpf_get_func_ret()
+	 * for now.
+	 */
+	err = bpf_get_func_ret(ctx, &ret);
+	if (err)
+		return 0;
+
+	test10_result = a == 16 && b == (void *)17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
+		e == (void *)20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && h == 23 &&
+		i == 24 && j == 25 && k == 26 && l == 27 &&
+		(int)ret == 258;
+	return 0;
+}
+
+__u64 test11_result = 0;
+SEC("fexit/bpf_testmod_fentry_test12")
+int BPF_PROG(test11, __u64 a, __u64 b, __u64 c, __u64 d, __u64 e, __u64 f,
+	     __u64 g, __u64 h, __u64 i, __u64 j, __u64 k, __u64 l)
+{
+	__u64 ret;
+	int err;
+
+	/* BPF_PROG() don't support 14 arguments, and ctx[12] can't be
+	 * accessed yet. So we get the return value by bpf_get_func_ret()
+	 * for now.
+	 */
+	err = bpf_get_func_ret(ctx, &ret);
+	if (err)
+		return 0;
+
+	test11_result = a == 16 && b == 17 && c == 18 && d == 19 &&
+		e == 20 && f == 21 && g == 22 && h == 23 &&
+		i == 24 && j == 25 && k == 26 && l == 27 &&
+		ret == 258;
+	return 0;
+}