From: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@gmail.com>
To: mhiramat@kernel.org
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
jiang.biao@linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/2] lib/test_fprobe: add testcase for mixed fprobe
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 16:32:38 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251015083238.2374294-3-dongml2@chinatelecom.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251015083238.2374294-1-dongml2@chinatelecom.cn>
Add the testcase for the fprobe, which will hook the same target with two
fprobe: entry, entry+exit. And the two fprobes will be registered with
different order.
fgraph and ftrace are both used for the fprobe, and this testcase is for
the mixed situation.
Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <dongml2@chinatelecom.cn>
---
lib/tests/test_fprobe.c | 99 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 98 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/tests/test_fprobe.c b/lib/tests/test_fprobe.c
index cf92111b5c79..108c7aa33cb4 100644
--- a/lib/tests/test_fprobe.c
+++ b/lib/tests/test_fprobe.c
@@ -12,7 +12,8 @@
static struct kunit *current_test;
-static u32 rand1, entry_val, exit_val;
+static u32 rand1, entry_only_val, entry_val, exit_val;
+static u32 entry_only_count, entry_count, exit_count;
/* Use indirect calls to avoid inlining the target functions */
static u32 (*target)(u32 value);
@@ -190,6 +191,101 @@ static void test_fprobe_skip(struct kunit *test)
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, unregister_fprobe(&fp));
}
+/* Handler for fprobe entry only case */
+static notrace int entry_only_handler(struct fprobe *fp, unsigned long ip,
+ unsigned long ret_ip,
+ struct ftrace_regs *fregs, void *data)
+{
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(current_test, preemptible());
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(current_test, ip, target_ip);
+
+ entry_only_count++;
+ entry_only_val = (rand1 / div_factor);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static notrace int fprobe_entry_multi_handler(struct fprobe *fp, unsigned long ip,
+ unsigned long ret_ip,
+ struct ftrace_regs *fregs,
+ void *data)
+{
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(current_test, preemptible());
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(current_test, ip, target_ip);
+
+ entry_count++;
+ entry_val = (rand1 / div_factor);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static notrace void fprobe_exit_multi_handler(struct fprobe *fp, unsigned long ip,
+ unsigned long ret_ip,
+ struct ftrace_regs *fregs,
+ void *data)
+{
+ unsigned long ret = ftrace_regs_get_return_value(fregs);
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(current_test, preemptible());
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(current_test, ip, target_ip);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(current_test, ret, (rand1 / div_factor));
+
+ exit_count++;
+ exit_val = ret;
+}
+
+static void check_fprobe_multi(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ entry_only_count = entry_count = exit_count = 0;
+ entry_only_val = entry_val = exit_val = 0;
+
+ target(rand1);
+
+ /* Verify all handlers were called */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1, entry_only_count);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1, entry_count);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1, exit_count);
+
+ /* Verify values are correct */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, (rand1 / div_factor), entry_only_val);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, (rand1 / div_factor), entry_val);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, (rand1 / div_factor), exit_val);
+}
+
+/* Test multiple fprobes hooking the same target function */
+static void test_fprobe_multi(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ struct fprobe fp1 = {
+ .entry_handler = fprobe_entry_multi_handler,
+ .exit_handler = fprobe_exit_multi_handler,
+ };
+ struct fprobe fp2 = {
+ .entry_handler = entry_only_handler,
+ };
+
+ current_test = test;
+
+ /* Test Case 1: Register in order 1 -> 2 */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, register_fprobe(&fp1, "fprobe_selftest_target", NULL));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, register_fprobe(&fp2, "fprobe_selftest_target", NULL));
+
+ check_fprobe_multi(test);
+
+ /* Unregister all */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, unregister_fprobe(&fp1));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, unregister_fprobe(&fp2));
+
+ /* Test Case 2: Register in order 2 -> 1 */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, register_fprobe(&fp2, "fprobe_selftest_target", NULL));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, register_fprobe(&fp1, "fprobe_selftest_target", NULL));
+
+ check_fprobe_multi(test);
+
+ /* Unregister all */
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, unregister_fprobe(&fp1));
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, unregister_fprobe(&fp2));
+}
+
static unsigned long get_ftrace_location(void *func)
{
unsigned long size, addr = (unsigned long)func;
@@ -217,6 +313,7 @@ static struct kunit_case fprobe_testcases[] = {
KUNIT_CASE(test_fprobe_syms),
KUNIT_CASE(test_fprobe_data),
KUNIT_CASE(test_fprobe_skip),
+ KUNIT_CASE(test_fprobe_multi),
{}
};
--
2.51.0
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-15 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-15 8:32 [PATCH v4 0/2] tracing: fprobe: optimization for entry only case Menglong Dong
2025-10-15 8:32 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] " Menglong Dong
2025-10-22 22:52 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2025-10-15 8:32 ` Menglong Dong [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20251015083238.2374294-3-dongml2@chinatelecom.cn \
--to=menglong8.dong@gmail.com \
--cc=jiang.biao@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®