> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_iter_memcg.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_iter_memcg.c
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_iter_memcg.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_iter_memcg.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -170,6 +180,8 @@ static void test_pgfault(struct bpf_link *link, struct memcg_query *memcg_query)
>  	if (!ASSERT_OK(read_stats(link), "read stats"))
>  		goto cleanup;
>
> +	ASSERT_NEQ(memcg_query->pgfault, (unsigned long)-1,
> +		  "bpf_mem_cgroup_page_state PGFAULT");
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The assertion message references bpf_mem_cgroup_page_state(), but the BPF
program actually uses bpf_mem_cgroup_vm_events() to retrieve the pgfault
value:

tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/cgroup_iter_memcg.c:
    memcg_query.pgfault = bpf_mem_cgroup_vm_events(memcg, PGFAULT);

Should the message be "bpf_mem_cgroup_vm_events PGFAULT" instead?


---
AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md

CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/21939182103

AI-authorship-score: low
AI-authorship-explanation: The commit message uses first-person narrative describing a real back-porting scenario, and the code changes are simple repetitive assertions typical of human-written test improvements.
issues-found: 1
issue-severity-score: low
issue-severity-explanation: Minor documentation issue where an assertion message references the wrong BPF function name; does not affect test correctness or system behavior.