From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add a test for open coded kmem_cache iter
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 14:35:38 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZyKmquDn3SNFzzgl@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZyGOng76IBUs8PtY@google.com>
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 06:40:46PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 11:08:00AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 12:48 AM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > The new subtest is attached to sleepable fentry of syncfs() syscall.
> > > It iterates the kmem_cache using bpf_for_each loop and count the number
> > > of entries. Finally it checks it with the number of entries from the
> > > regular iterator.
> > >
> > > $ ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t kmem_cache_iter
> > > ...
> > > #130/1 kmem_cache_iter/check_task_struct:OK
> > > #130/2 kmem_cache_iter/check_slabinfo:OK
> > > #130/3 kmem_cache_iter/open_coded_iter:OK
> > > #130 kmem_cache_iter:OK
> > > Summary: 1/3 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
> > >
> > > Also simplify the code by using attach routine of the skeleton.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> > > ---
[SNIP]
> > > +SEC("fentry.s/" SYS_PREFIX "sys_syncfs")
> > > +int open_coded_iter(const void *ctx)
> > > +{
> > > + struct kmem_cache *s;
> > > +
> > > + if (tgid != bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32)
> > > + return 0;
> >
> > Pls use syscall prog type and prog_run() it.
> > No need to attach to exotic syscalls and filter by pid.
>
> Sure, will update in v3.
>
> >
> > > +
> > > + bpf_for_each(kmem_cache, s) {
> > > + struct kmem_cache_result *r;
> > > +
> > > + r = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&slab_result, &open_coded_seen);
> > > + if (!r)
> > > + break;
> > > +
> > > + open_coded_seen++;
> > > +
> > > + if (r->obj_size != s->size)
> > > + break;
> >
> > The order of 'if' and ++ should probably be changed ?
> > Otherwise the last object isn't sufficiently checked.
>
> I don't think so. The last element should be an actual slab cache and
> then the iterator will return NULL to break the loop. I don't expect it
> will hit the if statement.
Oh, it seems you meant checking the obj_size. Ok then, I can move the
increment after the check.
Thanks,
Namhyung
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-30 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-24 7:48 [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Add open coded version of kmem_cache iterator Namhyung Kim
2024-10-24 7:48 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add a test for open coded kmem_cache iter Namhyung Kim
2024-10-24 18:08 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-10-30 1:40 ` Namhyung Kim
2024-10-30 21:35 ` Namhyung Kim [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZyKmquDn3SNFzzgl@google.com \
--to=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox