Previous fix aded bpf_clamp_umax() helper use to re-validate boundaries.
While that works correctly, it introduces more branches, which blows up
past 1 million instructions in no-alu32 variant of strobemeta selftests.
Switching len variable from u32 to u64 also fixes the issue and reduces
the number of validated instructions, so use that instead. Fix this
patch and bpf_clamp_umax() removed, both alu32 and no-alu32 selftests
pass.
Fixes: 0133c20480 ("selftests/bpf: Fix strobemeta selftest regression")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211101230118.1273019-1-andrii@kernel.org
This patch has two changes:
1) Adds a new function "test_success_cases" to test
successfully creating + adding + looking up a value
in a bloom filter map from the userspace side.
2) Use bpf_create_map instead of bpf_create_map_xattr in
the "test_fail_cases" and test_inner_map to make the
code look cleaner.
Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannekoong@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211029224909.1721024-4-joannekoong@fb.com
Running a BPF_PROG_TYPE_STRUCT_OPS prog for dummy_st_ops::test_N()
through bpf_prog_test_run(). Four test cases are added:
(1) attach dummy_st_ops should fail
(2) function return value of bpf_dummy_ops::test_1() is expected
(3) pointer argument of bpf_dummy_ops::test_1() works as expected
(4) multiple arguments passed to bpf_dummy_ops::test_2() are correct
Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211025064025.2567443-5-houtao1@huawei.com
This patch is closely related to commit 6016df8fe8 ("selftests/bpf:
Fix broken riscv build"). When clang includes the system include
directories, but targeting BPF program, __BITS_PER_LONG defaults to
32, unless explicitly set. Work around this problem, by explicitly
setting __BITS_PER_LONG to __riscv_xlen.
Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211028161057.520552-5-bjorn@kernel.org
After "skmsg: lose offset info in sk_psock_skb_ingress", the test case
with ktls failed. This because ktls parser(tls_read_size) return value
is 285 not 256.
The case like this:
tls_sk1 --> redir_sk --> tls_sk2
tls_sk1 sent out 512 bytes data, after tls related processing redir_sk
recved 570 btyes data, and redirect 512 (skb_use_parser) bytes data to
tls_sk2; but tls_sk2 needs 285 * 2 bytes data, receive timeout occurred.
Signed-off-by: Liu Jian <liujian56@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211029141216.211899-2-liujian56@huawei.com
Similar to the fix in commit:
e31eec77e4 ("bpf: selftests: Fix fd cleanup in get_branch_snapshot")
We use designated initializer to set fds to -1 without breaking on
future changes to MAX_SERVER constant denoting the array size.
The particular close(0) occurs on non-reuseport tests, so it can be seen
with -n 115/{2,3} but not 115/4. This can cause problems with future
tests if they depend on BTF fd never being acquired as fd 0, breaking
internal libbpf assumptions.
Fixes: 0ab5539f85 ("selftests/bpf: Tests for BPF_SK_LOOKUP attach point")
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211028063501.2239335-8-memxor@gmail.com
Also, avoid using CO-RE features, as lskel doesn't support CO-RE, yet.
Include both light and libbpf skeleton in same file to test both of them
together.
In c48e51c8b0 ("bpf: selftests: Add selftests for module kfunc support"),
I added support for generating both lskel and libbpf skel for a BPF
object, however the name parameter for bpftool caused collisions when
included in same file together. This meant that every test needed a
separate file for a libbpf/light skeleton separation instead of
subtests.
Change that by appending a "_lskel" suffix to the name for files using
light skeleton, and convert all existing users.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211028063501.2239335-7-memxor@gmail.com
This patch adds benchmark tests for comparing the performance of hashmap
lookups without the bloom filter vs. hashmap lookups with the bloom filter.
Checking the bloom filter first for whether the element exists should
overall enable a higher throughput for hashmap lookups, since if the
element does not exist in the bloom filter, we can avoid a costly lookup in
the hashmap.
On average, using 5 hash functions in the bloom filter tended to perform
the best across the widest range of different entry sizes. The benchmark
results using 5 hash functions (running on 8 threads on a machine with one
numa node, and taking the average of 3 runs) were roughly as follows:
value_size = 4 bytes -
10k entries: 30% faster
50k entries: 40% faster
100k entries: 40% faster
500k entres: 70% faster
1 million entries: 90% faster
5 million entries: 140% faster
value_size = 8 bytes -
10k entries: 30% faster
50k entries: 40% faster
100k entries: 50% faster
500k entres: 80% faster
1 million entries: 100% faster
5 million entries: 150% faster
value_size = 16 bytes -
10k entries: 20% faster
50k entries: 30% faster
100k entries: 35% faster
500k entres: 65% faster
1 million entries: 85% faster
5 million entries: 110% faster
value_size = 40 bytes -
10k entries: 5% faster
50k entries: 15% faster
100k entries: 20% faster
500k entres: 65% faster
1 million entries: 75% faster
5 million entries: 120% faster
Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannekoong@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211027234504.30744-6-joannekoong@fb.com
This patch adds benchmark tests for the throughput (for lookups + updates)
and the false positive rate of bloom filter lookups, as well as some
minor refactoring of the bash script for running the benchmarks.
These benchmarks show that as the number of hash functions increases,
the throughput and the false positive rate of the bloom filter decreases.
>From the benchmark data, the approximate average false-positive rates
are roughly as follows:
1 hash function = ~30%
2 hash functions = ~15%
3 hash functions = ~5%
4 hash functions = ~2.5%
5 hash functions = ~1%
6 hash functions = ~0.5%
7 hash functions = ~0.35%
8 hash functions = ~0.15%
9 hash functions = ~0.1%
10 hash functions = ~0%
For reference data, the benchmarks run on one thread on a machine
with one numa node for 1 to 5 hash functions for 8-byte and 64-byte
values are as follows:
1 hash function:
50k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 51.1 M/s operations
Updates - 33.6 M/s operations
False positive rate: 24.15%
64-byte value
Lookups - 15.7 M/s operations
Updates - 15.1 M/s operations
False positive rate: 24.2%
100k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 51.0 M/s operations
Updates - 33.4 M/s operations
False positive rate: 24.04%
64-byte value
Lookups - 15.6 M/s operations
Updates - 14.6 M/s operations
False positive rate: 24.06%
500k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 50.5 M/s operations
Updates - 33.1 M/s operations
False positive rate: 27.45%
64-byte value
Lookups - 15.6 M/s operations
Updates - 14.2 M/s operations
False positive rate: 27.42%
1 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 49.7 M/s operations
Updates - 32.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 27.45%
64-byte value
Lookups - 15.4 M/s operations
Updates - 13.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 27.58%
2.5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 47.2 M/s operations
Updates - 31.8 M/s operations
False positive rate: 30.94%
64-byte value
Lookups - 15.3 M/s operations
Updates - 13.2 M/s operations
False positive rate: 30.95%
5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 41.1 M/s operations
Updates - 28.1 M/s operations
False positive rate: 31.01%
64-byte value
Lookups - 13.3 M/s operations
Updates - 11.4 M/s operations
False positive rate: 30.98%
2 hash functions:
50k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 34.1 M/s operations
Updates - 20.1 M/s operations
False positive rate: 9.13%
64-byte value
Lookups - 8.4 M/s operations
Updates - 7.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 9.21%
100k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 33.7 M/s operations
Updates - 18.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 9.13%
64-byte value
Lookups - 8.4 M/s operations
Updates - 7.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 9.19%
500k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 32.7 M/s operations
Updates - 18.1 M/s operations
False positive rate: 12.61%
64-byte value
Lookups - 8.4 M/s operations
Updates - 7.5 M/s operations
False positive rate: 12.61%
1 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 30.6 M/s operations
Updates - 18.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 12.54%
64-byte value
Lookups - 8.0 M/s operations
Updates - 7.0 M/s operations
False positive rate: 12.52%
2.5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 25.3 M/s operations
Updates - 16.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 16.77%
64-byte value
Lookups - 7.9 M/s operations
Updates - 6.5 M/s operations
False positive rate: 16.88%
5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 20.8 M/s operations
Updates - 14.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 16.78%
64-byte value
Lookups - 7.0 M/s operations
Updates - 6.0 M/s operations
False positive rate: 16.78%
3 hash functions:
50k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 25.1 M/s operations
Updates - 14.6 M/s operations
False positive rate: 7.65%
64-byte value
Lookups - 5.8 M/s operations
Updates - 5.5 M/s operations
False positive rate: 7.58%
100k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 24.7 M/s operations
Updates - 14.1 M/s operations
False positive rate: 7.71%
64-byte value
Lookups - 5.8 M/s operations
Updates - 5.3 M/s operations
False positive rate: 7.62%
500k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 22.9 M/s operations
Updates - 13.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 2.62%
64-byte value
Lookups - 5.6 M/s operations
Updates - 4.8 M/s operations
False positive rate: 2.7%
1 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 19.8 M/s operations
Updates - 12.6 M/s operations
False positive rate: 2.60%
64-byte value
Lookups - 5.3 M/s operations
Updates - 4.4 M/s operations
False positive rate: 2.69%
2.5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 16.2 M/s operations
Updates - 10.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 4.49%
64-byte value
Lookups - 4.9 M/s operations
Updates - 4.1 M/s operations
False positive rate: 4.41%
5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 18.8 M/s operations
Updates - 9.2 M/s operations
False positive rate: 4.45%
64-byte value
Lookups - 5.2 M/s operations
Updates - 3.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 4.54%
4 hash functions:
50k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 19.7 M/s operations
Updates - 11.1 M/s operations
False positive rate: 1.01%
64-byte value
Lookups - 4.4 M/s operations
Updates - 4.0 M/s operations
False positive rate: 1.00%
100k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 19.5 M/s operations
Updates - 10.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 1.00%
64-byte value
Lookups - 4.3 M/s operations
Updates - 3.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 0.97%
500k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 18.2 M/s operations
Updates - 10.6 M/s operations
False positive rate: 2.05%
64-byte value
Lookups - 4.3 M/s operations
Updates - 3.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 2.05%
1 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 15.5 M/s operations
Updates - 9.6 M/s operations
False positive rate: 1.99%
64-byte value
Lookups - 4.0 M/s operations
Updates - 3.4 M/s operations
False positive rate: 1.99%
2.5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 13.8 M/s operations
Updates - 7.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 3.91%
64-byte value
Lookups - 3.7 M/s operations
Updates - 3.6 M/s operations
False positive rate: 3.78%
5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 13.0 M/s operations
Updates - 6.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 3.93%
64-byte value
Lookups - 3.5 M/s operations
Updates - 3.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 3.39%
5 hash functions:
50k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 16.4 M/s operations
Updates - 9.1 M/s operations
False positive rate: 0.78%
64-byte value
Lookups - 3.5 M/s operations
Updates - 3.2 M/s operations
False positive rate: 0.77%
100k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 16.3 M/s operations
Updates - 9.0 M/s operations
False positive rate: 0.79%
64-byte value
Lookups - 3.5 M/s operations
Updates - 3.2 M/s operations
False positive rate: 0.78%
500k entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 15.1 M/s operations
Updates - 8.8 M/s operations
False positive rate: 1.82%
64-byte value
Lookups - 3.4 M/s operations
Updates - 3.0 M/s operations
False positive rate: 1.78%
1 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 13.2 M/s operations
Updates - 7.8 M/s operations
False positive rate: 1.81%
64-byte value
Lookups - 3.2 M/s operations
Updates - 2.8 M/s operations
False positive rate: 1.80%
2.5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 10.5 M/s operations
Updates - 5.9 M/s operations
False positive rate: 0.29%
64-byte value
Lookups - 3.2 M/s operations
Updates - 2.4 M/s operations
False positive rate: 0.28%
5 mil entries
8-byte value
Lookups - 9.6 M/s operations
Updates - 5.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 0.30%
64-byte value
Lookups - 3.2 M/s operations
Updates - 2.7 M/s operations
False positive rate: 0.30%
Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannekoong@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211027234504.30744-5-joannekoong@fb.com
This patch adds test cases for bpf bloom filter maps. They include tests
checking against invalid operations by userspace, tests for using the
bloom filter map as an inner map, and a bpf program that queries the
bloom filter map for values added by a userspace program.
Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannekoong@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211027234504.30744-4-joannekoong@fb.com
Function in modules could appear in /proc/kallsyms in random order.
ffffffffa02608a0 t bpf_testmod_loop_test
ffffffffa02600c0 t __traceiter_bpf_testmod_test_writable_bare
ffffffffa0263b60 d __tracepoint_bpf_testmod_test_write_bare
ffffffffa02608c0 T bpf_testmod_test_read
ffffffffa0260d08 t __SCT__tp_func_bpf_testmod_test_writable_bare
ffffffffa0263300 d __SCK__tp_func_bpf_testmod_test_read
ffffffffa0260680 T bpf_testmod_test_write
ffffffffa0260860 t bpf_testmod_test_mod_kfunc
Therefore, we cannot reliably use kallsyms_find_next() to find the end of
a function. Replace it with a simple guess (start + 128). This is good
enough for this test.
Signed-off-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211022234814.318457-1-songliubraving@fb.com
Skipping the second half of the test is not enough to silent the warning
in dmesg. Skip the whole test before we can either properly silent the
warning in kernel, or fix LBR snapshot for VM.
Fixes: 025bd7c753 ("selftests/bpf: Add test for bpf_get_branch_snapshot")
Fixes: aa67fdb464 ("selftests/bpf: Skip the second half of get_branch_snapshot in vm")
Signed-off-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211026000733.477714-1-songliubraving@fb.com
Instead of using subtests in bpf_verif_scale selftest, turn each scale
sub-test into its own test. Each subtest is compltely independent and
just reuses a bit of common test running logic, so the conversion is
trivial. For convenience, keep all of BPF verifier scale tests in one
file.
This conversion shaves off a significant amount of time when running
test_progs in parallel mode. E.g., just running scale tests (-t verif_scale):
BEFORE
======
Summary: 24/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
real 0m22.894s
user 0m0.012s
sys 0m22.797s
AFTER
=====
Summary: 24/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
real 0m12.044s
user 0m0.024s
sys 0m27.869s
Ten second saving right there. test_progs -j is not yet ready to be
turned on by default, unfortunately, and some tests fail almost every
time, but this is a good improvement nevertheless. Ignoring few
failures, here is sequential vs parallel run times when running all
tests now:
SEQUENTIAL
==========
Summary: 206/953 PASSED, 4 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
real 1m5.625s
user 0m4.211s
sys 0m31.650s
PARALLEL
========
Summary: 204/952 PASSED, 4 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED
real 0m35.550s
user 0m4.998s
sys 0m39.890s
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211022223228.99920-5-andrii@kernel.org
It seems to cause a lot of harm to kprobe/tracepoint selftests. Yucong
mentioned before that it does manipulate sysfs, which might be the
reason. So let's mark it as serial, though ideally it would be less
intrusive on the system at test.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211022223228.99920-4-andrii@kernel.org
Recent change to use tp/syscalls/sys_enter_nanosleep for perf_buffer
selftests causes this selftest to fail on 4.9 kernel in libbpf CI ([0]):
libbpf: prog 'handle_sys_enter': failed to attach to perf_event FD 6: Invalid argument
libbpf: prog 'handle_sys_enter': failed to attach to tracepoint 'syscalls/sys_enter_nanosleep': Invalid argument
It's not exactly clear why, because perf_event itself is created for
this tracepoint, but I can't even compile 4.9 kernel locally, so it's
hard to figure this out. If anyone has better luck and would like to
help investigating this, I'd really appreciate this.
For now, unblock CI by switching back to raw_syscalls/sys_enter, but reduce
amount of unnecessary samples emitted by filter by process ID. Use
explicit ARRAY map for that to make it work on 4.9 as well, because
global data isn't yet supported there.
Fixes: aa274f98b2 ("selftests/bpf: Fix possible/online index mismatch in perf_buffer test")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211022201342.3490692-1-andrii@kernel.org
The perf_buffer fails on system with offline cpus:
# test_progs -t perf_buffer
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:nr_cpus 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:nr_on_cpus 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:attach_kprobe 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:perf_buf__new 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:epoll_fd 0 nsec
skipping offline CPU #4
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:perf_buffer__poll 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:seen_cpu_cnt 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:buf_cnt 0 nsec
...
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:fd_check 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:drain_buf 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:PASS:consume_buf 0 nsec
serial_test_perf_buffer:FAIL:cpu_seen cpu 5 not seen
#88 perf_buffer:FAIL
Summary: 0/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED
If the offline cpu is from the middle of the possible set,
we get mismatch with possible and online cpu buffers.
The perf buffer test calls perf_buffer__consume_buffer for
all 'possible' cpus, but the library holds only 'online'
cpu buffers and perf_buffer__consume_buffer returns them
based on index.
Adding extra (online) index to keep track of online buffers,
we need the original (possible) index to trigger trace on
proper cpu.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211021114132.8196-3-jolsa@kernel.org
cpu_number exists only on Intel and aarch64, so skip the test involing
it on other arches. An alternative would be to replace it with an
exported non-ifdefed primitive-typed percpu variable from the common
code, but there appears to be none.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211013160902.428340-2-iii@linux.ibm.com
Patch set [1] introduced BTF_KIND_TAG to allow tagging
declarations for struct/union, struct/union field, var, func
and func arguments and these tags will be encoded into
dwarf. They are also encoded to btf by llvm for the bpf target.
After BTF_KIND_TAG is introduced, we intended to use it
for kernel __user attributes. But kernel __user is actually
a type attribute. Upstream and internal discussion showed
it is not a good idea to mix declaration attribute and
type attribute. So we proposed to introduce btf_type_tag
as a type attribute and existing btf_tag renamed to
btf_decl_tag ([2]).
This patch renamed BTF_KIND_TAG to BTF_KIND_DECL_TAG and some
other declarations with *_tag to *_decl_tag to make it clear
the tag is for declaration. In the future, BTF_KIND_TYPE_TAG
might be introduced per [3].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210914223004.244411-1-yhs@fb.com/
[2] https://reviews.llvm.org/D111588
[3] https://reviews.llvm.org/D111199
Fixes: b5ea834dde ("bpf: Support for new btf kind BTF_KIND_TAG")
Fixes: 5b84bd1036 ("libbpf: Add support for BTF_KIND_TAG")
Fixes: 5c07f2fec0 ("bpftool: Add support for BTF_KIND_TAG")
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211012164838.3345699-1-yhs@fb.com
The verifier tests added in commit c48e51c8b0 ("bpf: selftests: Add
selftests for module kfunc support") fail on s390, since the JIT does
not support calling kernel functions. This is most likely an issue for
all the other non-Intel arches, as well as on Intel with
!CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF or !CONFIG_BPF_JIT.
Trying to check for messages from all the possible add_kfunc_call()
failure cases in test_verifier looks pointless, so do a much simpler
thing instead: just like it's already done in do_prog_test_run(), skip
the tests that fail to load with ENOTSUPP.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211007173329.381754-1-iii@linux.ibm.com
