Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:47:14 -0800
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To:     KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 7/8] bpf: Add tests for task_local_storage
Message-ID: <20201103184714.iukuqfw2byls3s4k@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
References: <20201103153132.2717326-1-kpsingh@chromium.org>
 <20201103153132.2717326-8-kpsingh@chromium.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201103153132.2717326-8-kpsingh@chromium.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 04:31:31PM +0100, KP Singh wrote:
> +
> +struct storage {
> +	void *inode;
> +	unsigned int value;
> +	/* Lock ensures that spin locked versions of local stoage operations
> +	 * also work, most operations in this tests are still single threaded
> +	 */
> +	struct bpf_spin_lock lock;
> +};

I think it's a good idea to test spin_lock in local_storage,
but it seems the test is not doing it fully.
It's only adding it to the storage, but the program is not accessing it.