Re: [PATCH] test: Clean up stack_fbt test

Kris Van Hees <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.dtrace
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 04:56:41PM -0400, [email protected] wrote:
> From: Eugene Loh <[email protected]>
> 
> The idea behind the test is to check the stack() output for some fbt
> probe for specific expected frames.  An attempt was made to specify the
> exact stack that was expected, but there are too many variations among
> kernel versions and so maintaining the test was difficult.  Loosen the
> test to check for only a few expected frames.
> 
> The test was also checking that stack()'s first 3 frames matched
> stack(3), but such a test is already provided by, for example,
>     test/unittest/printf/tst.stack.d
>     test/unittest/stack/tst.stack.d
> So, drop the stack(3) stuff.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eugene Loh <[email protected]>

Reviewed-by: Kris Van Hees <[email protected]>

... with caveat that we really ought to take a look at some of these tests
    that need more frequent updating due to kernel details changing underneath
    us.

> ---
>  test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.r  |  1 +
>  test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.sh | 89 +++++++---------------------
>  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.r
> 
> diff --git a/test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.r b/test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.r
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000..2e9ba477f
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.r
> @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> +success
> diff --git a/test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.sh b/test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.sh
> index 15b85be13..f3d321e7f 100755
> --- a/test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.sh
> +++ b/test/unittest/stack/tst.stack_fbt.sh
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
>  # Licensed under the Universal Permissive License v 1.0 as shown at
>  # http://oss.oracle.com/licenses/upl.
>  #
> -# Test the stack action with default stack depth and depth 3.
> +# Check the stack action for expected frames.
>  
>  dtrace=$1
>  
> @@ -26,8 +26,6 @@ BEGIN
>  fbt::vfs_write:entry
>  {
>  	stack();
> -	printf("first 3 frames\n");
> -	stack(3);
>  	exit(0);
>  }' >& dtrace.out
>  
> @@ -37,17 +35,16 @@ if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
>  	exit 1
>  fi
>  
> -# Strip out
> -# - blank lines
> -# - "constprop"
> -# - "isra"
> +# Ignore blank lines and strip out
> +# - ".constprop.[0-9]"
>  # - "_after_hwframe"    (x86 starting with UEK8)
> -# - pointer values
> +# - "+0x[0-9a-f]*$"
> +# - leading spaces
>  
>  awk 'NF != 0 { sub("\\.constprop\\.[0-9]", "");
> -               sub("\\.isra\\.[0-9]", "");
>                 sub("_after_hwframe\\+", "+");
> -               sub(/+0x[0-9a-f]*$/, "+{ptr}");
> +               sub(/+0x[0-9a-f]*$/, "");
> +               sub(/^ */, "");
>                 print }' dtrace.out > dtrace.post
>  if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
>  	echo ERROR: awk failed
> @@ -55,77 +52,35 @@ if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
>  	exit 1
>  fi
>  
> -# Figure out what stack to expect.
> +# Identify, in order, a few frames we expect to see.
>  
> -read MAJOR MINOR <<< `uname -r | grep -Eo '^[0-9]+\.[0-9]+' | tr '.' ' '`
> -
> -if [ $MAJOR -eq 5 -a $MINOR -lt 8 ]; then
> -	# up to 5.8
> -	KERVER="A"
> -else
> -	# starting at 5.8
> -	KERVER="B"
> -fi
> -
> -if [ $(uname -m) == "x86_64" -a $KERVER == "A" ]; then
> -cat << EOF > dtrace.cmp
> -              vmlinux\`vfs_write+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`__x64_sys_write+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`x64_sys_call+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`do_syscall_64+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`entry_SYSCALL_64+{ptr}
> -EOF
> -elif [ $(uname -m) == "aarch64" -a $KERVER == "A" ]; then
> -cat << EOF > dtrace.cmp
> -              vmlinux\`vfs_write
> -              vmlinux\`__arm64_sys_write+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`el0_svc_common+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`el0_svc_handler+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`el0_svc+{ptr}
> -EOF
> -elif [ $(uname -m) == "x86_64" -a $KERVER == "B" ]; then
> -cat << EOF > dtrace.cmp
> -              vmlinux\`vfs_write+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`ksys_write+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`do_syscall_64+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`entry_SYSCALL_64+{ptr}
> -EOF
> -elif [ $(uname -m) == "aarch64" -a $KERVER == "B" ]; then
> -cat << EOF > dtrace.cmp
> -              vmlinux\`vfs_write
> -              vmlinux\`__arm64_sys_write+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`invoke_syscall+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`el0_svc_common+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`do_el0_svc+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`el0_svc+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`el0t_64_sync_handler+{ptr}
> -              vmlinux\`el0t_64_sync+{ptr}
> -EOF
> +if [ $(uname -m) == "x86_64" ]; then
> +	frames="vfs_write do_syscall_64 entry_SYSCALL_64"
> +elif [ $(uname -m) == "aarch64" ]; then
> +	frames="vfs_write __arm64_sys_write el0_svc_common el0_svc"
>  else
>  	echo ERROR: unrecognized platform
>  	uname -r
>  	uname -m
>  	exit 1
>  fi
> -
> -# Add the first 3 frames a second time.
> -
> -head -3 dtrace.cmp > dtrace.tmp
> -echo first 3 frames >> dtrace.cmp
> -cat dtrace.tmp >> dtrace.cmp
> +for frame in $frames; do
> +	echo 'vmlinux`'$frame >> dtrace.cmp
> +done
>  
>  # Compare results.
>  
> -if ! diff -q dtrace.cmp dtrace.post; then
> -	echo ERROR: results do not match
> -	diff dtrace.cmp dtrace.post
> -	echo "==== expect"
> +diff dtrace.cmp dtrace.post | grep '^<' > missing.frames
> +if [ `cat missing.frames | wc -l` -ne 0 ]; then
> +	echo ERROR: missing some expected frames
> +	echo === expected frames include:
>  	cat dtrace.cmp
> -	echo "==== actual"
> +	echo === actual frames are:
>  	cat dtrace.out
> +	echo === missing expected frames:
> +	cat missing.frames
>  	exit 1
>  fi
>  
>  echo success
> -
>  exit 0
> -- 
> 2.47.3
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.