[RFC bpf-next 08/13] selftests: bpf: Avoid attaching to bpf_check()

[Daniel Xu]

bpf_check(), as it currently exists, will soon be going away to make way
for loadable BPF verifier support. Fixup selftests so they fentry attach
to a more reliable location.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_assert.c | 2 +-
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_fail.c   | 4 ++--
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_assert.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_assert.c
index 5e0a1ca96d4e..50bc52cbb2e7 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_assert.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_assert.c
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ int check_assert_generic(struct __sk_buff *ctx)
 	return data[128];
 }
 
-SEC("?fentry/bpf_check")
+SEC("?fentry/bpf_fentry_test1")
 __failure __msg("At program exit the register R1 has smin=64 smax=64")
 int check_assert_with_return(void *ctx)
 {
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_fail.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_fail.c
index 8a0fdff89927..b44cb0a6c9d9 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_fail.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/exceptions_fail.c
@@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ __noinline int exception_cb_bad_ret(u64 c)
 	return c;
 }
 
-SEC("?fentry/bpf_check")
+SEC("?fentry/bpf_fentry_test1")
 __exception_cb(exception_cb_bad_ret)
 __failure __msg("At program exit the register R0 has unknown scalar value should")
 int reject_set_exception_cb_bad_ret1(void *ctx)
@@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ int reject_set_exception_cb_bad_ret1(void *ctx)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("?fentry/bpf_check")
+SEC("?fentry/bpf_fentry_test1")
 __failure __msg("At program exit the register R1 has smin=64 smax=64 should")
 int reject_set_exception_cb_bad_ret2(void *ctx)
 {
-- 
2.47.1