On Mon, 2025-09-08 at 14:21 +0100, Mykyta Yatsenko wrote: > On 9/8/25 08:43, Eduard Zingerman wrote: > > On Fri, 2025-09-05 at 17:45 +0100, Mykyta Yatsenko wrote: > > > From: Mykyta Yatsenko <yatsenko@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Introducing selftests that check BPF task work scheduling mechanism. > > > Validate that verifier does not accepts incorrect calls to > > > bpf_task_work_schedule kfunc. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mykyta Yatsenko <yatsenko@xxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > The test cases in this patch check functional correctness, but there > > is no attempt to do some stress testing of the state machine. > > E.g. how hard/feasible would it be to construct a test that attempts > > to exercise both branches of the (state == BPF_TW_SCHEDULED) in the > > bpf_task_work_cancel_and_free()? > Good point, I have stress test, but did not include it in the patches, > as it takes longer to run. > I had to add logs in the kernel code to make sure cancellation/freeing > branches are hit. > https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/commit/86408b074ab0a2d290977846c3e99a07443ac604 Ack. I see no harm in having such test run for a couple of seconds on CI, but up to you.
