[PATCH] tests/bpf: Fix the bpf test to check for libtraceevent support

[Athira Rajeev]

> On 06-Feb-2023, at 8:10 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme at kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> Em Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 09:27:13AM +0530, Athira Rajeev escreveu:
>>> On 02-Feb-2023, at 6:27 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme at kernel.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Em Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 07:20:01PM +0530, Athira Rajeev escreveu:
>>>> "bpf" tests fails in environment with missing libtraceevent
>>>> support as below:
>>>> 
>>>> # ./perf test 36
>>>> 36: BPF filter                                                      :
>>>> 36.1: Basic BPF filtering                                           : FAILED!
>>>> 36.2: BPF pinning                                                   : FAILED!
>>>> 36.3: BPF prologue generation                                       : FAILED!
>>>> 
>>>> The environment has clang but missing the libtraceevent
>>>> devel. Hence perf is compiled without libtraceevent support.
>>> 
>>> Thanks, applied.
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Thanks for checking
>> 
>> Arnaldo, this is applied to tmp.perf/core branch ?
> 
> I thought I had this in :-\ Now its in tmp.perf/core.
> 
> - Arnaldo

Hi Arnaldo, 

Thanks for picking it.

Athira
> 
>> Athira 
>>> 
>>> - Arnaldo
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Detailed logs:
>>>> 	./perf test -v "Basic BPF filtering"
>>>> 
>>>> 	Failed to add BPF event syscalls:sys_enter_epoll_pwait
>>>> 	bpf: tracepoint call back failed, stop iterate
>>>> 	Failed to add events selected by BPF
>>>> 
>>>> The bpf tests tris to add probe event which fails
>>>> at "parse_events_add_tracepoint" function due to missing
>>>> libtraceevent. Add check for "HAVE_LIBTRACEEVENT" in the
>>>> "tests/bpf.c" before proceeding with the test.
>>>> 
>>>> With the change,
>>>> 
>>>> 	# ./perf test 36
>>>> 	36: BPF filter                                                      :
>>>> 	36.1: Basic BPF filtering                                           : Skip (not compiled in or missing libtraceevent support)
>>>> 	36.2: BPF pinning                                                   : Skip (not compiled in or missing libtraceevent support)
>>>> 	36.3: BPF prologue generation                                       : Skip (not compiled in or missing libtraceevent support)
>>>> 
>>>> Signed-off-by: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> tools/perf/tests/bpf.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
>>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c b/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c
>>>> index 17c023823713..4af39528f611 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c
>>>> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@
>>>> #define NR_ITERS       111
>>>> #define PERF_TEST_BPF_PATH "/sys/fs/bpf/perf_test"
>>>> 
>>>> -#ifdef HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT
>>>> +#if defined(HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT) && defined(HAVE_LIBTRACEEVENT)
>>>> #include <linux/bpf.h>
>>>> #include <bpf/bpf.h>
>>>> 
>>>> @@ -330,10 +330,10 @@ static int test__bpf(int i)
>>>> static int test__basic_bpf_test(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused,
>>>> 				int subtest __maybe_unused)
>>>> {
>>>> -#ifdef HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT
>>>> +#if defined(HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT) && defined(HAVE_LIBTRACEEVENT)
>>>> 	return test__bpf(0);
>>>> #else
>>>> -	pr_debug("Skip BPF test because BPF support is not compiled\n");
>>>> +	pr_debug("Skip BPF test because BPF or libtraceevent support is not compiled\n");
>>>> 	return TEST_SKIP;
>>>> #endif
>>>> }
>>>> @@ -341,10 +341,10 @@ static int test__basic_bpf_test(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused,
>>>> static int test__bpf_pinning(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused,
>>>> 			     int subtest __maybe_unused)
>>>> {
>>>> -#ifdef HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT
>>>> +#if defined(HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT) && defined(HAVE_LIBTRACEEVENT)
>>>> 	return test__bpf(1);
>>>> #else
>>>> -	pr_debug("Skip BPF test because BPF support is not compiled\n");
>>>> +	pr_debug("Skip BPF test because BPF or libtraceevent support is not compiled\n");
>>>> 	return TEST_SKIP;
>>>> #endif
>>>> }
>>>> @@ -352,17 +352,17 @@ static int test__bpf_pinning(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused,
>>>> static int test__bpf_prologue_test(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused,
>>>> 				   int subtest __maybe_unused)
>>>> {
>>>> -#if defined(HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT) && defined(HAVE_BPF_PROLOGUE)
>>>> +#if defined(HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT) && defined(HAVE_BPF_PROLOGUE) && defined(HAVE_LIBTRACEEVENT)
>>>> 	return test__bpf(2);
>>>> #else
>>>> -	pr_debug("Skip BPF test because BPF support is not compiled\n");
>>>> +	pr_debug("Skip BPF test because BPF or libtraceevent support is not compiled\n");
>>>> 	return TEST_SKIP;
>>>> #endif
>>>> }
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> static struct test_case bpf_tests[] = {
>>>> -#ifdef HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT
>>>> +#if defined(HAVE_LIBBPF_SUPPORT) && defined(HAVE_LIBTRACEEVENT)
>>>> 	TEST_CASE("Basic BPF filtering", basic_bpf_test),
>>>> 	TEST_CASE_REASON("BPF pinning", bpf_pinning,
>>>> 			"clang isn't installed or environment missing BPF support"),
>>>> @@ -373,9 +373,9 @@ static struct test_case bpf_tests[] = {
>>>> 	TEST_CASE_REASON("BPF prologue generation", bpf_prologue_test, "not compiled in"),
>>>> #endif
>>>> #else
>>>> -	TEST_CASE_REASON("Basic BPF filtering", basic_bpf_test, "not compiled in"),
>>>> -	TEST_CASE_REASON("BPF pinning", bpf_pinning, "not compiled in"),
>>>> -	TEST_CASE_REASON("BPF prologue generation", bpf_prologue_test, "not compiled in"),
>>>> +	TEST_CASE_REASON("Basic BPF filtering", basic_bpf_test, "not compiled in or missing libtraceevent support"),
>>>> +	TEST_CASE_REASON("BPF pinning", bpf_pinning, "not compiled in or missing libtraceevent support"),
>>>> +	TEST_CASE_REASON("BPF prologue generation", bpf_prologue_test, "not compiled in or missing libtraceevent support"),
>>>> #endif
>>>> 	{ .name = NULL, }
>>>> };
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.39.0
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> - Arnaldo
>> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> - Arnaldo