* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: check if module is present in the path before insert [not found] <1504772342-21878-1-git-send-email-naresh.kamboju@linaro.org> @ 2017-09-07 9:16 ` Daniel Borkmann 2017-11-06 15:23 ` Naresh Kamboju [not found] ` <1504772342-21878-2-git-send-email-naresh.kamboju@linaro.org> 1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2017-09-07 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: naresh.kamboju, shuahkh, linux-kselftest Cc: linux-kernel, davem, alexei.starovoitov, netdev On 09/07/2017 10:19 AM, naresh.kamboju@linaro•org wrote: > From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> > > The test script works when kernel source and build module test_bpf.ko > present on the machine. This patch will check if module is present in > the path. > > Signed-off-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> Looks good, what changed between v1 and v2? Didn't get the cover letter in case there was one. ;) Which tree are you targeting? There are usually a lot of changes in BPF selftests going the usual route via net and net-next tree as we often require to put test cases along the BPF patches. Given the merge window now and given one can regard it as a fix, it's net tree. I'm also ok if Shuah wants to pick it up this window as test_kmod.sh hasn't been changed in quite a while, so no merge conflicts expected. Anyway, for the patch: Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox•net> Thanks! > --- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh | 8 +++++--- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh > index 6d58cca8e235..a53eb1cb54ef 100755 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh > @@ -9,9 +9,11 @@ test_run() > > echo "[ JIT enabled:$1 hardened:$2 ]" > dmesg -C > - insmod $SRC_TREE/lib/test_bpf.ko 2> /dev/null > - if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then > - rc=1 > + if [ -f $SRC_TREE/lib/test_bpf.ko ]; then > + insmod $SRC_TREE/lib/test_bpf.ko 2> /dev/null > + if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then > + rc=1 > + fi > fi > rmmod test_bpf 2> /dev/null > dmesg | grep FAIL > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: check if module is present in the path before insert 2017-09-07 9:16 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: check if module is present in the path before insert Daniel Borkmann @ 2017-11-06 15:23 ` Naresh Kamboju 2017-11-06 16:16 ` Shuah Khan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Naresh Kamboju @ 2017-11-06 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Borkmann, Shuah Khan Cc: Shuah Khan, linux-kselftest, linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org, davem, alexei.starovoitov, netdev On 7 September 2017 at 14:46, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox•net> wrote: > On 09/07/2017 10:19 AM, naresh.kamboju@linaro•org wrote: >> >> From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> >> >> The test script works when kernel source and build module test_bpf.ko >> present on the machine. This patch will check if module is present in >> the path. >> >> Signed-off-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> > > > Looks good, what changed between v1 and v2? Didn't get the cover > letter in case there was one. ;) No change for 1/2 to v2 1/2. The only change was to v2 2/2. > > Which tree are you targeting? There are usually a lot of changes > in BPF selftests going the usual route via net and net-next tree > as we often require to put test cases along the BPF patches. Given > the merge window now and given one can regard it as a fix, it's > net tree. I'm also ok if Shuah wants to pick it up this window as > test_kmod.sh hasn't been changed in quite a while, so no merge > conflicts expected. I did not see any conflict for this file (selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh) > > Anyway, for the patch: > > Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox•net> > > Thanks! Thank you. - Naresh > > >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh | 8 +++++--- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh >> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh >> index 6d58cca8e235..a53eb1cb54ef 100755 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh >> @@ -9,9 +9,11 @@ test_run() >> >> echo "[ JIT enabled:$1 hardened:$2 ]" >> dmesg -C >> - insmod $SRC_TREE/lib/test_bpf.ko 2> /dev/null >> - if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then >> - rc=1 >> + if [ -f $SRC_TREE/lib/test_bpf.ko ]; then >> + insmod $SRC_TREE/lib/test_bpf.ko 2> /dev/null >> + if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then >> + rc=1 >> + fi >> fi >> rmmod test_bpf 2> /dev/null >> dmesg | grep FAIL >> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: check if module is present in the path before insert 2017-11-06 15:23 ` Naresh Kamboju @ 2017-11-06 16:16 ` Shuah Khan 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Shuah Khan @ 2017-11-06 16:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Naresh Kamboju, Daniel Borkmann, Shuah Khan Cc: linux-kselftest, linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org, davem, alexei.starovoitov, netdev, shuah Khan On 11/06/2017 08:23 AM, Naresh Kamboju wrote: > On 7 September 2017 at 14:46, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox•net> wrote: >> On 09/07/2017 10:19 AM, naresh.kamboju@linaro•org wrote: >>> >>> From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> >>> >>> The test script works when kernel source and build module test_bpf.ko >>> present on the machine. This patch will check if module is present in >>> the path. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> >> >> >> Looks good, what changed between v1 and v2? Didn't get the cover >> letter in case there was one. ;) > > No change for 1/2 to v2 1/2. The only change was to v2 2/2. > >> >> Which tree are you targeting? There are usually a lot of changes >> in BPF selftests going the usual route via net and net-next tree >> as we often require to put test cases along the BPF patches. Given >> the merge window now and given one can regard it as a fix, it's >> net tree. I'm also ok if Shuah wants to pick it up this window as >> test_kmod.sh hasn't been changed in quite a while, so no merge >> conflicts expected. > > I did not see any conflict for this file (selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh) > >> >> Anyway, for the patch: >> >> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox•net> >> >> Thanks! > > Thank you. > > - Naresh Hi Naresh, Please rebase and resend both patches with Daniel's Acks. thanks, -- Shuah ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <1504772342-21878-2-git-send-email-naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>]
* Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: use modprobe on target device [not found] ` <1504772342-21878-2-git-send-email-naresh.kamboju@linaro.org> @ 2017-09-07 9:20 ` Daniel Borkmann 2017-11-06 15:08 ` Naresh Kamboju 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2017-09-07 9:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: naresh.kamboju, shuahkh, linux-kselftest Cc: linux-kernel, davem, alexei.starovoitov, netdev On 09/07/2017 10:19 AM, naresh.kamboju@linaro•org wrote: > From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> > > on ARM and ARM64 devices kernel source tree is not available so > insmod "$SRC_TREE/lib/test_bpf.ko" is not working. > > on these target devices the test_bpf.ko is installed under > /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/lib/ > so use modprobe dry run to check for missing test_bpf.ko module and > insert for testing. > > Signed-off-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox•net> One really small nit that could probably be fixed up along the way when applying: > --- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh > index a53eb1cb54ef..eab9a970d742 100755 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh > @@ -14,6 +14,16 @@ test_run() > if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then > rc=1 > fi > + else Looks like a whitespace slipped in right before the "else", so should be removed to only habe the tab indent. > + # Use modprobe dry run to check for missing test_bpf module > + if ! /sbin/modprobe -q -n test_bpf; then > + echo "test_bpf: [SKIP]" > + elif /sbin/modprobe -q test_bpf; then > + echo "test_bpf: ok" > + else > + echo "test_bpf: [FAIL]" > + rc=1 > + fi > fi > rmmod test_bpf 2> /dev/null > dmesg | grep FAIL > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: use modprobe on target device 2017-09-07 9:20 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: use modprobe on target device Daniel Borkmann @ 2017-11-06 15:08 ` Naresh Kamboju 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Naresh Kamboju @ 2017-11-06 15:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Borkmann, Shuah Khan Cc: Shuah Khan, linux-kselftest, linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org, davem, alexei.starovoitov, netdev On 7 September 2017 at 14:50, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox•net> wrote: > On 09/07/2017 10:19 AM, naresh.kamboju@linaro•org wrote: >> >> From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> >> >> on ARM and ARM64 devices kernel source tree is not available so >> insmod "$SRC_TREE/lib/test_bpf.ko" is not working. >> >> on these target devices the test_bpf.ko is installed under >> /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/lib/ >> so use modprobe dry run to check for missing test_bpf.ko module and >> insert for testing. >> >> Signed-off-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro•org> > > > Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox•net> > > One really small nit that could probably be fixed up along the > way when applying: > Sorry for that. >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh | 10 ++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh >> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh >> index a53eb1cb54ef..eab9a970d742 100755 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_kmod.sh >> @@ -14,6 +14,16 @@ test_run() >> if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then >> rc=1 >> fi >> + else > > > Looks like a whitespace slipped in right before the "else", > so should be removed to only habe the tab indent. Would it be a good idea to send v3 patch with right indent ? - Naresh > > >> + # Use modprobe dry run to check for missing test_bpf >> module >> + if ! /sbin/modprobe -q -n test_bpf; then >> + echo "test_bpf: [SKIP]" >> + elif /sbin/modprobe -q test_bpf; then >> + echo "test_bpf: ok" >> + else >> + echo "test_bpf: [FAIL]" >> + rc=1 >> + fi >> fi >> rmmod test_bpf 2> /dev/null >> dmesg | grep FAIL >> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-11-06 16:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1504772342-21878-1-git-send-email-naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
2017-09-07 9:16 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: check if module is present in the path before insert Daniel Borkmann
2017-11-06 15:23 ` Naresh Kamboju
2017-11-06 16:16 ` Shuah Khan
[not found] ` <1504772342-21878-2-git-send-email-naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>
2017-09-07 9:20 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: use modprobe on target device Daniel Borkmann
2017-11-06 15:08 ` Naresh Kamboju
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox