History log of /linux-master/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/read_bpf_task_storage_busy.c
Revision Date Author Comments
# c8ed6685 08-Mar-2023 Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>

selftests/bpf: fix lots of silly mistakes pointed out by compiler

Once we enable -Wall for BPF sources, compiler will complain about lots
of unused variables, variables that are set but never read, etc.

Fix all these issues first before enabling -Wall in Makefile.

Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230309054015.4068562-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>


# 73b97bc7 01-Sep-2022 Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>

selftests/bpf: Test concurrent updates on bpf_task_storage_busy

Under full preemptible kernel, task local storage lookup operations on
the same CPU may update per-cpu bpf_task_storage_busy concurrently. If
the update of bpf_task_storage_busy is not preemption safe, the final
value of bpf_task_storage_busy may become not-zero forever and
bpf_task_storage_trylock() will always fail. So add a test case to
ensure the update of bpf_task_storage_busy is preemption safe.

Will skip the test case when CONFIG_PREEMPT is disabled, and it can only
reproduce the problem probabilistically. By increasing
TASK_STORAGE_MAP_NR_LOOP and running it under ARM64 VM with 4-cpus, it
takes about four rounds to reproduce:

> test_maps is modified to only run test_task_storage_map_stress_lookup()
$ export TASK_STORAGE_MAP_NR_THREAD=256
$ export TASK_STORAGE_MAP_NR_LOOP=81920
$ export TASK_STORAGE_MAP_PIN_CPU=1
$ time ./test_maps
test_task_storage_map_stress_lookup(135):FAIL:bad bpf_task_storage_busy got -2

real 0m24.743s
user 0m6.772s
sys 0m17.966s

Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220901061938.3789460-5-houtao@huaweicloud.com
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>