Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] selftests: bpf: test_kmod.sh: use modprobe on target device

[Naresh Kamboju]

On 7 September 2017 at 14:50, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 09/07/2017 10:19 AM, naresh.kamboju@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>
>> From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> 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@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> 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
>>
>