Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Remove redundant checks in get_stack_print_output()

[Andrii Nakryiko]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 9:39 AM Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The checks preceding CHECK macro are redundant, remove them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_stack_raw_tp.c | 6 ++----
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_stack_raw_tp.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_stack_raw_tp.c
> index 16048978a1ef..5f2ab720dabd 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_stack_raw_tp.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_stack_raw_tp.c
> @@ -76,10 +76,8 @@ static void get_stack_print_output(void *ctx, int cpu, void *data, __u32 size)
>                         good_user_stack = true;
>         }
>
> -       if (!good_kern_stack)
> -           CHECK(!good_kern_stack, "kern_stack", "corrupted kernel stack\n");
> -       if (!good_user_stack)
> -           CHECK(!good_user_stack, "user_stack", "corrupted user stack\n");
> +       CHECK(!good_kern_stack, "kern_stack", "corrupted kernel stack\n");
> +       CHECK(!good_user_stack, "user_stack", "corrupted user stack\n");

I suspect it was to avoid super long verbose logs, as each CHECK()
emits one line into output and here we might be getting a lot of
samples. So let's keep it as is. But for the future let's try getting
rid of CHECK()s as much as possible in favor of ASSERT_xxx(). Thanks.

>  }
>
>  void test_get_stack_raw_tp(void)
> --
> 2.35.1
>