Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AC48C433EF for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 20:04:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241194AbhLPUEM (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:04:12 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39062 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229835AbhLPUEK (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:04:10 -0500 Received: from mail-yb1-xb32.google.com (mail-yb1-xb32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b32]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF9CCC061574; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 12:04:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yb1-xb32.google.com with SMTP id d10so325505ybe.3; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 12:04:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=GdDT7fgaRT12dHtkLlXU8bb/jY5+OF81ewRwhn48r6k=; b=cDV3WjRyiOm+kOhD5xF5xysuN2erCnSE/CV+ORT/DW+K3FBLLGY6NpxSHHPB5EmrNq TBwPXsoat88ZSzGdCzQ94co1mqOz/6AF3ugwmwGiATib2jS5qTTwtQgsBrText0WhmmH b1VJhGjGSJxhg9nbBn+zuNnmoNS+3cQwGiLFY1nF/M7sxqZ3MnPkyzDOrduLihk+kfYh 1yoSHYMGQbQbcbnICVG77YO8XHoPu6CFmCCrHBvkFWPt47oOOjZVmSl9131UhpsgXtbm KFLG3xKuTZtkq+FNkhmX7qE97WmEgAcpAvGzbawo8SldtYryUsN7kKcZHFKTXwH+UhP3 t2vA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GdDT7fgaRT12dHtkLlXU8bb/jY5+OF81ewRwhn48r6k=; b=an9vZX0r7Yhna0Sn2qmiGKtgaGJ6FELGX2c9C1CrEBr8QsEHYcQzWCbXBeJsqJg3aP O8ZVTZECNtV94RxDpccncP9dXZBTQSK9CdI56arPSV7w2LnQuBXjJ0ZUPwxxVWdREbE7 mo10wuKaPbnEDqE0K890rBnsY6p9YTGh8LH4R0O1TQW/Ryi8eIUOEtp2QQvRb8VGaz04 Rb9h8P1jzfEVPCMTZdidSZacDNboANXzAFfBFkudUg+gmkW3BmcizLoBqgD5WvUuVp2R EtipT9YSttZ2oppZ22fPkFk+0k5dG3PrNu8yGQ162h00aEGB81cZbZTuF3R25id++wZv LYkw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531o3/WWQpuqVKNDDM2vb3UJlbakoTB55+ESrQezIdMEqTPN80x7 cKrMagjCWtRMVie67Ri0IBjktj+t3cMWoPYYBRg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJya9BM+Mcmy7aJRR+XGyA5T2i3+ELM7RIX4XCVoURcpUHy4KSU6X0TqMTnlxvzQSQy6D25MfEBYnihj93grjfY= X-Received: by 2002:a25:37cb:: with SMTP id e194mr15740944yba.449.1639685049006; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 12:04:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211210173433.13247-1-skhan@linuxfoundation.org> <53490dba-b7fd-a3f8-6574-5736c83aa90d@linuxfoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <53490dba-b7fd-a3f8-6574-5736c83aa90d@linuxfoundation.org> From: Andrii Nakryiko Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 12:03:57 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: remove ARRAY_SIZE defines from tests To: Shuah Khan Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Shuah Khan , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Network Development , bpf , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 11:51 AM Shuah Khan wrote: > > On 12/16/21 12:30 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 6:42 AM Shuah Khan wrote: > >> > >> On 12/15/21 9:04 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > >>> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 12:27 PM Shuah Khan wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 12/11/21 6:53 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 9:34 AM Shuah Khan wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ARRAY_SIZE is defined in multiple test files. Remove the definitions > >>>>>> and include header file for the define instead. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Remove ARRAY_SIZE define and add include bpf_util.h to bring in the > >>>>>> define. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/netif_receive_skb.c | 5 +---- > >>>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/profiler.inc.h | 5 +---- > >>>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sysctl_loop1.c | 5 +---- > >>>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sysctl_loop2.c | 4 +--- > >>>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sysctl_prog.c | 5 +---- > >>>>>> 5 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/netif_receive_skb.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/netif_receive_skb.c > >>>>>> index 1d8918dfbd3f..7a5ebd330689 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/netif_receive_skb.c > >>>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/netif_receive_skb.c > >>>>>> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ > >>>>>> #include > >>>>>> #include > >>>>>> #include > >>>>>> +#include > >>>>> > >>>>> It doesn't look like you've built it. > >>>>> > >>>>> progs/test_sysctl_prog.c:11:10: fatal error: 'bpf/bpf_util.h' file not found > >>>>> #include > >>>>> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >>>>> CLNG-BPF [test_maps] socket_cookie_prog.o > >>>>> progs/test_sysctl_loop2.c:11:10: fatal error: 'bpf/bpf_util.h' file not found > >>>>> #include > >>>>> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >>>>> 1 error generated. > >>>>> In file included from progs/profiler2.c:6: > >>>>> progs/profiler.inc.h:7:10: fatal error: 'bpf/bpf_util.h' file not found > >>>>> #include > >>>>> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Sorry about that. I built it - I think something is wrong in my env. Build > >>>> fails complaining about not finding vmlinux - I overlooked that the failure > >>>> happened before it got to progs. > >>>> > >>>> Error: failed to load BTF from .../vmlinux: No such file or directory > >>> > >>> Please make sure that you build vmlinux before you build selftests, > >>> BPF selftests use vmlinux to generate vmlinux.h with all kernel types > >>> (among other things). So please also make sure that all the setting in > >>> selftests/bpf/config were used in your Kconfig. > >>> > >>>> > >> > >> The problem in my env. is that I don't have CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF in > >> my config and then don't have the dwarves and llvm-strip on my system. > >> Pains of upgrading. > >> > >> I am all set now. On the other hand the vmlinux.h is a mess. It has > >> no guards for defines and including stdio.h and this generated > >> vmlinux.h causes all sorts of problems. > > > > It does have > > > > #ifndef __VMLINUX_H__ > > #define __VMLINUX_H__ > > > > Are we talking about the same vmlinux.h here? > > > > Yes we are. The guard it has works when vmlinux.h is included > twice. It defines a lot of common defines which are the problem. > Unless you add guards around each one of them, including vmlinux.h > is problematic if you also include other standard includes. > > You can try to include bpf_util.h for example from one of the > test in progs to see the problem. bpf_util.h is a user-space header, it's not going to work from the BPF program side. If you look at any of progs/*.c (all of which are BPF program-side source code), not a single one is including bpf_util.h. > > thanks, > -- Shuah