From: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2019 20:39:01 -0700
Subject: selftests/bpf: Make reference_tracking test use subtests
Patch-mainline: v5.5-rc1
Git-commit: 8af1c8b8d6223c31fada6148fd870257407952d1
References: bsc#1155518

reference_tracking is actually a set of 9 sub-tests. Make it explicitly so.

Also, add explicit "classifier/" prefix to BPF program section names to
let libbpf correctly guess program type. Thus, also remove explicit
bpf_prog__set_type() call.

Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20191021033902.3856966-7-andriin@fb.com
Acked-by: Gary Lin <glin@suse.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reference_tracking.c |    3 +-
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup_kern.c     |   18 ++++++------
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reference_tracking.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reference_tracking.c
@@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ void test_reference_tracking(void)
 		if (strstr(title, ".text") != NULL)
 			continue;
 
-		bpf_program__set_type(prog, BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS);
+		if (!test__start_subtest(title))
+			continue;
 
 		/* Expect verifier failure if test name has 'fail' */
 		if (strstr(title, "fail") != NULL) {
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup_kern.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup_kern.c
@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ static struct bpf_sock_tuple *get_tuple(
 	return result;
 }
 
-SEC("sk_lookup_success")
+SEC("classifier/sk_lookup_success")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test0(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	void *data_end = (void *)(long)skb->data_end;
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_test0(struct __sk_buff
 	return sk ? TC_ACT_OK : TC_ACT_UNSPEC;
 }
 
-SEC("sk_lookup_success_simple")
+SEC("classifier/sk_lookup_success_simple")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test1(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_test1(struct __sk_buff
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_use_after_free")
+SEC("classifier/fail_use_after_free")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_uaf(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_uaf(struct __sk_buff *
 	return family;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_modify_sk_pointer")
+SEC("classifier/fail_modify_sk_pointer")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_modptr(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_modptr(struct __sk_buf
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_modify_sk_or_null_pointer")
+SEC("classifier/fail_modify_sk_or_null_pointer")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_modptr_or_null(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_modptr_or_null(struct
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_no_release")
+SEC("classifier/fail_no_release")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test2(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_test2(struct __sk_buff
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_release_twice")
+SEC("classifier/fail_release_twice")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test3(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_test3(struct __sk_buff
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_release_unchecked")
+SEC("classifier/fail_release_unchecked")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test4(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ void lookup_no_release(struct __sk_buff
 	bpf_sk_lookup_tcp(skb, &tuple, sizeof(tuple), BPF_F_CURRENT_NETNS, 0);
 }
 
-SEC("fail_no_release_subcall")
+SEC("classifier/fail_no_release_subcall")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test5(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	lookup_no_release(skb);