On Wed, 28 May 2025 at 02:45, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Could you please modify one of the selftests to check lines reported by > dump stack? Ok, will try to do it with a regex pattern to match the overall layout. > > Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx> > > [...] > > > diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h > > index 6985e793e927..aab5ea17a329 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/bpf.h > > +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h > > @@ -3613,8 +3613,10 @@ __printf(2, 3) > > int bpf_stream_stage_printk(struct bpf_stream_stage *ss, const char *fmt, ...); > > int bpf_stream_stage_commit(struct bpf_stream_stage *ss, struct bpf_prog *prog, > > enum bpf_stream_id stream_id); > > +int bpf_stream_stage_dump_stack(struct bpf_stream_stage *ss); > > > > #define bpf_stream_printk(...) bpf_stream_stage_printk(&__ss, __VA_ARGS__) > > +#define bpf_stream_dump_stack() bpf_stream_stage_dump_stack(&__ss) > > I don't think we should add macro with hard-coded variable names (`__ss`) > in common headers. Hm, right. But this is supposed to be used within the stream stage block, and we have __i variables in macros that wrap around loops etc., hence the double / triple underscore to not conflict. Anyhow, I'm open to other suggestions. > > [...]
