Re: [PATCH bpf v1 2/3] selftests/bpf: Print a message when tester could not run a program
From: Jakub Kicinski
Date: Thu May 16 2019 - 11:53:03 EST
On Thu, 16 May 2019 11:29:39 +0200, Krzesimir Nowak wrote:
> > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > > index ccd896b98cac..bf0da03f593b 100644
> > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > > @@ -825,11 +825,20 @@ static int do_prog_test_run(int fd_prog, bool unpriv, uint32_t expected_val,
> > > tmp, &size_tmp, &retval, NULL);
> > > if (unpriv)
> > > set_admin(false);
> > > - if (err && errno != 524/*ENOTSUPP*/ && errno != EPERM) {
> > > - printf("Unexpected bpf_prog_test_run error ");
> > > - return err;
> > > + if (err) {
> > > + switch (errno) {
> > > + case 524/*ENOTSUPP*/:
> > > + printf("Did not run the program (not supported) ");
> > > + return 0;
> > > + case EPERM:
> > > + printf("Did not run the program (no permission) ");
> > > + return 0;
> >
> > Perhaps use strerror(errno)?
>
> As I said in the commit message, I open-coded those messages because
> strerror for ENOTSUPP returns "Unknown error 524".
Ah, sorry, missed that. I wonder if that's something worth addressing
in libc, since the BPF subsystem uses ENOTSUPP a lot.