Hi Alan,
On Tue Aug 5, 2025 at 5:09 PM CEST, Alan Maguire wrote:
> On 07/07/2025 15:02, Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation) wrote:
>> Add a small binary representing specific cases likely absent from
>> standard vmlinux or kernel modules files. As a starter, the introduced
>> binary exposes a few functions consuming structs passed by value, some
>> passed by register, some passed on the stack:
>>
>> int main(void);
>> int test_bin_func_struct_on_stack_ko(int, void *, char, short int, int, \
>> void *, char, short int, struct test_bin_struct_packed);
>> int test_bin_func_struct_on_stack_ok(int, void *, char, short int, int, \
>> void *, char, short int, struct test_bin_struct);
>> int test_bin_func_struct_ok(int, void *, char, struct test_bin_struct);
>> int test_bin_func_ok(int, void *, char, short int);
>>
>> Then enrich btf_functions.sh to make it perform the following steps:
>> - build the binary
>> - 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
>>
>> 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...
>> pahole: /home/alexis/src/pahole/tests/bin/test_bin: Invalid argument
>> Found 1 legitimately skipped function due to uncertain loc
>> Ok
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation) <alexis.lothore@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks for the updated changes+test. I think it'd be good to have this
> be less verbose in successful case. Currently I see:
>
> 1: Validation of BTF encoding of functions; this may take some time: Ok
> Validation of BTF encoding corner cases with test_bin functions; this
> may take some time: make: Entering directory
> '/home/almagui/src/github/dwarves/tests/bin'
> gcc test_bin.c -Wall -Wextra -Werror -g -o test_bin
> make: Leaving directory '/home/almagui/src/github/dwarves/tests/bin'
> No skipped functions. Done.
>
> Ideally we just want the "Ok" for success in non-vebose mode. I'd
> propose making the following changes in order to support that; if these
> are okay by you there's no need to send another revision.
I'm perfeclty fine with the idea, thanks for handling it. Just a
comment/question below
> diff --git a/tests/btf_functions.sh b/tests/btf_functions.sh
> index f97bdf5..a4ab67e 100755
> --- a/tests/btf_functions.sh
> +++ b/tests/btf_functions.sh
> @@ -110,7 +110,6 @@ skipped_cnt=$(wc -l ${outdir}/skipped_fns | awk '{
> print $1}')
>
> if [[ "$skipped_cnt" == "0" ]]; then
> echo "No skipped functions. Done."
> - exit 0
> fi
Shouldn't we get rid of this whole if block then, similarly to what you
have done with the other one below ?
Thanks,
Alexis
--
Alexis Lothoré, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
