Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 5/5] selftests/bpf: Fix arena_spin_lock selftest failure

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 29/08/25 10:21 pm, Saket Kumar Bhaskar wrote:
For systems having CONFIG_NR_CPUS set to > 1024 in kernel config
the selftest fails as arena_spin_lock_irqsave() returns EOPNOTSUPP.

The selftest is skipped incase bpf program returns EOPNOTSUPP,
with a descriptive message logged.

Signed-off-by: Saket Kumar Bhaskar <skb99@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/arena_spin_lock.c      | 13 +++++++++++++
  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_spin_lock.c |  5 ++++-
  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/arena_spin_lock.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/arena_spin_lock.c
index 0223fce4db2b..1ec1ca987893 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/arena_spin_lock.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/arena_spin_lock.c
@@ -40,8 +40,13 @@ static void *spin_lock_thread(void *arg)
err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(prog_fd, &topts);
  	ASSERT_OK(err, "test_run err");
+
+	if (topts.retval == -EOPNOTSUPP)
+		goto end;
+
  	ASSERT_EQ((int)topts.retval, 0, "test_run retval");
+end:
  	pthread_exit(arg);
  }
@@ -63,6 +68,7 @@ static void test_arena_spin_lock_size(int size)
  	skel = arena_spin_lock__open_and_load();
  	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "arena_spin_lock__open_and_load"))
  		return;
+
  	if (skel->data->test_skip == 2) {
  		test__skip();
  		goto end;
@@ -86,6 +92,13 @@ static void test_arena_spin_lock_size(int size)
  			goto end_barrier;
  	}
+ if (skel->data->test_skip == 2) {
+		printf("%s:SKIP: %d CPUs exceed the maximum supported by arena spinlock\n",
+		       __func__, get_nprocs());
+		test__skip();
+		goto end_barrier;
+	}
+
  	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->counter, repeat * nthreads, "check counter value");
end_barrier:
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_spin_lock.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_spin_lock.c
index c4500c37f85e..a475b974438e 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_spin_lock.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/arena_spin_lock.c
@@ -37,8 +37,11 @@ int prog(void *ctx)
  #if defined(ENABLE_ATOMICS_TESTS) && defined(__BPF_FEATURE_ADDR_SPACE_CAST)
  	unsigned long flags;
- if ((ret = arena_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock, flags)))
+	if ((ret = arena_spin_lock_irqsave(&lock, flags))) {
+		if (ret == -EOPNOTSUPP)
+			test_skip = 2;
  		return ret;

test_skip being set to `1` when the test runs seems counter intuitive.
How about setting test_skip to `0` when run conditions are met
and test_skip=1 if run conditions are not met and
test_skip=2 when operation is not supported?

- Hari




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux