On Thu Jul 3, 2025 at 8:31 PM CEST, Ihor Solodrai wrote:
> On 7/3/25 2:02 AM, Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation) wrote:
>> Add a small kernel module representing specific cases likely absent from
>> standard vmlinux files. As a starter, the introduced module exposes a
>> few functions consuming structs passed by value, some passed by
>> register, some passed on the stack:
>>
>> int kmod_test_init(void);
>> int test_kmod_func_ok(int, void *, char, short int);
>> int test_kmod_func_struct_ok(int, void *, char, struct kmod_struct);
>> int test_kmod_func_struct_on_stack_ok(int, void *, char, short int, int, \
>> void *, char, short int, struct kmod_struct);
>> int test_kmod_func_struct_on_stack_ko(int, void *, char, short int, int, \
>> void *, char, short int, struct kmod_struct_packed);
>>
>> Then enrich btf_functions.sh to make it perform the following steps:
>> - build the module
>> - generate BTF info and pfunct listing, both with dwarf and the
>> generated BTF
>> - check that any function encoded in BTF is found in DWARF
>> - check that any function announced as skipped is indeed absent from BTF
>> - check that any skipped function has been skipped due to uncertain
>> parameter location
>>
>> Those new tests are executed only if a kernel directory is provided as
>> script's second argument, they are otherwise skipped.
>
> While this shouldn't be a problem for CI, since it checks out a kernel
> tree to test vmlinux as input, I wonder if there is a way to do the
> same test without this dependency.
>
> We need to generate a binary with DWARF, containing function
> prototypes with packed/aligned attributes. Give it to pahole and see
> that those functions were skipped.
>
> Any reason it must be a kernel module? Am I missing something?
I guess I have no valid reason, I just focused too much on a specific use
case :) It would indeed be simpler with a bare userspace binary, I'll check
further and change it.
>> Example of the new test execution:
>> Encoding...Matched 4 functions exactly.
>> Ok
>> Validation of skipped function logic...
>> Skipped encoding 1 functions in BTF.
>> Ok
>> Validating skipped functions have uncertain parameter location...
>> Found 1 legitimately skipped function due to uncertain loc
>> Ok
> This part fails for me:
>
> isolodrai@isolodrai-fedora-PC2K40WQ:~/pahole/tests$
> KDIR=/home/isolodrai/kernels/bpf-next
> vmlinux=/home/isolodrai/kernels/bpf-next/vmlinux ./btf_functions.sh
> Validation of BTF encoding of functions; this may take some time: Ok
> Validation of BTF encoding corner cases with kmod functions; this may
> take some time: make: Entering directory '/home/isolodrai/kernels/bpf-next'
> Makefile:199: *** specified external module directory "./kmod" does not
> exist. Stop.
> make: Leaving directory '/home/isolodrai/kernels/bpf-next'
> No skipped functions. Done.
>
> Maybe:
>
> diff --git a/tests/btf_functions.sh b/tests/btf_functions.sh
> index 64810b7..fcb1591 100755
> --- a/tests/btf_functions.sh
> +++ b/tests/btf_functions.sh
> @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ fi
> echo -n "Validation of BTF encoding corner cases with kmod functions;
> this may take some time: "
>
> test -n "$VERBOSE" && printf "\nBuilding kmod..."
> -tests_dir=$(dirname $0)
> +tests_dir=$(realpath $(dirname $0))
> make -C ${KDIR} M=${tests_dir}/kmod
>
> test -n "$VERBOSE" && printf "\nEncoding..."
>
>
> Also, in case kernel is built with LLVM, one must set LLVM=1.
> Not sure if this is detectable by the test.
Yeah, the tests_dir computation is a bit fragile. I saw it in tests.sh, and
so I assumed use cases were simple enough to keep this simple logic. I'll
update it to make it more robust.
Alexis
--
Alexis Lothoré, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
