| Message ID | 20200118010546.74279-1-sdf@google.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | BPF Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bpf-next] selftests/bpf: don't check for btf fd in test_btf | expand |
Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > After commit 0d13bfce023a ("libbpf: Don't require root for > bpf_object__open()") we no longer load BTF during bpf_object__open(), > so let's remove the expectation from test_btf that the fd is not -1. > The test currently fails. > > Before: > BTF libbpf test[1] (test_btf_haskv.o): do_test_file:4152:FAIL bpf_object__btf_fd: -1 > BTF libbpf test[2] (test_btf_newkv.o): do_test_file:4152:FAIL bpf_object__btf_fd: -1 > BTF libbpf test[3] (test_btf_nokv.o): do_test_file:4152:FAIL bpf_object__btf_fd: -1 > > After: > BTF libbpf test[1] (test_btf_haskv.o): OK > BTF libbpf test[2] (test_btf_newkv.o): OK > BTF libbpf test[3] (test_btf_nokv.o): OK > > Fixes: 0d13bfce023a ("libbpf: Don't require root forbpf_object__open()") > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> > --- Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
On 1/18/20 2:05 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > After commit 0d13bfce023a ("libbpf: Don't require root for > bpf_object__open()") we no longer load BTF during bpf_object__open(), > so let's remove the expectation from test_btf that the fd is not -1. > The test currently fails. > > Before: > BTF libbpf test[1] (test_btf_haskv.o): do_test_file:4152:FAIL bpf_object__btf_fd: -1 > BTF libbpf test[2] (test_btf_newkv.o): do_test_file:4152:FAIL bpf_object__btf_fd: -1 > BTF libbpf test[3] (test_btf_nokv.o): do_test_file:4152:FAIL bpf_object__btf_fd: -1 > > After: > BTF libbpf test[1] (test_btf_haskv.o): OK > BTF libbpf test[2] (test_btf_newkv.o): OK > BTF libbpf test[3] (test_btf_nokv.o): OK > > Fixes: 0d13bfce023a ("libbpf: Don't require root forbpf_object__open()") > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> Applied, thanks!
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_btf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_btf.c index 3d617e806054..93040ca83e60 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_btf.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_btf.c @@ -4148,10 +4148,6 @@ static int do_test_file(unsigned int test_num) if (CHECK(IS_ERR(obj), "obj: %ld", PTR_ERR(obj))) return PTR_ERR(obj); - err = bpf_object__btf_fd(obj); - if (CHECK(err == -1, "bpf_object__btf_fd: -1")) - goto done; - prog = bpf_program__next(NULL, obj); if (CHECK(!prog, "Cannot find bpf_prog")) { err = -1;
After commit 0d13bfce023a ("libbpf: Don't require root for bpf_object__open()") we no longer load BTF during bpf_object__open(), so let's remove the expectation from test_btf that the fd is not -1. The test currently fails. Before: BTF libbpf test[1] (test_btf_haskv.o): do_test_file:4152:FAIL bpf_object__btf_fd: -1 BTF libbpf test[2] (test_btf_newkv.o): do_test_file:4152:FAIL bpf_object__btf_fd: -1 BTF libbpf test[3] (test_btf_nokv.o): do_test_file:4152:FAIL bpf_object__btf_fd: -1 After: BTF libbpf test[1] (test_btf_haskv.o): OK BTF libbpf test[2] (test_btf_newkv.o): OK BTF libbpf test[3] (test_btf_nokv.o): OK Fixes: 0d13bfce023a ("libbpf: Don't require root forbpf_object__open()") Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_btf.c | 4 ---- 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)