From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qt1-f170.google.com (mail-qt1-f170.google.com [209.85.160.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05102320A24 for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2026 19:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.160.170 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772395201; cv=none; b=mew2DaMI/vDVdtZF8QyvbXbuc0rjHTfJhJpp4Iils6cCYOnp3751Ja0BV2tmZm8OFMlB6MBE+SFlqc7zPDzwzguoiWxr7f4NS0wsmkPYd6tdBL3dooqR0OkwTeJwF+yu99IpjpJtSyltcdFwRjhVCoFM2pX4LvAok5Ncp46dBBg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772395201; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WWIkJNVmNbb5s40Lw7qY9ZV/U/jfKqwR3caVxyzHWEk=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:To:Cc:Subject:From: References:In-Reply-To; b=o/FPRw/uffhIWVL8KUPLinIIhgZKMFT0swJpcnqqu5LANx7NjQpGKKhTR9ephgBSZig72OGU/4TqGKk4T2y5f/KKUqQZbH4ckmo3Jt3gAM+i41hZ1q77OsIdaMrq+OzEvBPN5MboUBTEmhrDyWfqwq9ALrEMZs5+Ykd3CKTGpss= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=etsalapatis.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=etsalapatis.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=etsalapatis-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@etsalapatis-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b=QhqX+In/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.160.170 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=etsalapatis.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=etsalapatis.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=etsalapatis-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@etsalapatis-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b="QhqX+In/" Received: by mail-qt1-f170.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-506a67282a0so38945761cf.0 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2026 11:59:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=etsalapatis-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1772395199; x=1772999999; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:references:from:subject:cc:to:message-id:date :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=2MPuDLHfqvO1ZyfsytNxtGmAvrYVDUhBX3Sj2y7Z8a8=; b=QhqX+In/jpocOt8pcFOqGN/WoqxqFpgjExgLkzFY/1cYnojI3vKo5C10Y1dcGVd+xK eX2ORL/zKJafjLDicg+SlcqrDIS9F5/G5TtlZRHG1Cfan16566jALO6qjWHxLNLdbStD 6BeBx3iftJDMfuRW/qq7oRC53AznzUwH0wXrLjqe2pHQlEGtgJA9q+TGlSitTZGOA6CC xwIoYUfomNrPp2QL8QUa3iDeNoFxzrcMk8tH8sBrjtPwATZMSHpyONcscvqo9jc+GWzu Tc+/F8JvR/MuRBY35HUm1fADKz/2mVufYaZ+SjN2WAA/E+07LnzGafxGcBcaC6xktN/d iR5g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1772395199; x=1772999999; h=in-reply-to:references:from:subject:cc:to:message-id:date :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=2MPuDLHfqvO1ZyfsytNxtGmAvrYVDUhBX3Sj2y7Z8a8=; b=s9sciCCYF8iiLucIW2TZOoyx541hxMONq5Ip8gTrqzlHg3AXA1QrHtGc+BP2xMVGIG HRX5vKN0v49ZGUGvBjQiWvNSQf6iQyBffcHuJTU7BbAgYxyHiqEhmH+SYpVz6nDaALkW bZX7CkXaCl7JvoDvMNXHcUiKbg8rnbwOG1CFeKuqolxvAjoBgVjHvgBUpqneF23jSbal 2fKXV7S23XVVUJutQOm1u4Qsh6FfsG8o7EoPB3+OaC0FO5Xagzd6qE5wL1G+AhqOQylq PhcU4/KgctpZH5bsjNGu/O8fEd3nnTvLqalOrQXRCdyJdl2nP/bPOIAfVsTVJ9l1LXIB CSSw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXO8+0bIWb6KBy/o9BJug0p+d9TyIhqGb1H5JJReQ17FPvoaJO5zZFAfwND3XwqgW1HcFoM9VQvscO/hLQ=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw4wPozgpIFmS3NTuAEjf4dVV3GDTWRKN7jT15JKnMxLu12WIY6 c+fHos6NPHnz6deVL4Dzlocs/1rp98nnzR9tIvPOZbQ4AFd1UipRn5pNu3DjfCBtNxnzkWqPpIZ cTP7JDfk= X-Gm-Gg: ATEYQzw5UxYZcwFf4K3tHv6+RLX6+F+9BEOKb4CeiJ0jzo7oceIP5V86r6i2pqkn+V4 VyYGaNmzIGk82VaU5op9WeCIb9jfdCq/9n1qyCzLOHgu6sFngpjAwzBciy+qcsLCi+wlsg1znET tSeEagykzUZgQ70en0D5VJz9Eb7Osgwh9EZFzStvMmIMcnigCId1umHIfmlhns2Fa4vmJyJKpMR 4N+NMcMSEKNYMk5xPwTg5lFJoXbznXk0jbqBTk1dvvOVc1ZNlI0qbnBIH5IzdLGm1GpA+Su4HKd mvJeMVQZqPtzPOQpKaeGqS5LIfMJBBhbF7iVk2YXNyj7XXYvTlSEYTVuehcr9o+ehLp0f0JXnd4 P8qPZMtBWjxAXsJDQSY92HfuAHGO1CPF1SginoQD/ey8P4xVLg7iFyvoEUfmDtxqEuqou8qG0DM 4kLpUJ5RImbjhJx1xp4vV5kSg9NELoX6LbPw== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5d15:0:b0:506:a22d:9c71 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-507528fcf08mr127998801cf.33.1772395198897; Sun, 01 Mar 2026 11:59:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([140.174.219.137]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-899fc95502dsm4630116d6.25.2026.03.01.11.59.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 01 Mar 2026 11:59:58 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2026 14:59:57 -0500 Message-Id: To: "Sun Jian" , "Andrii Nakryiko" , "Shuah Khan" Cc: "Eduard Zingerman" , "Alexei Starovoitov" , "Daniel Borkmann" , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/bpf: bpf_cookie: make perf_event subtest trigger reliably From: "Emil Tsalapatis" X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.1 References: <20260227164037.84110-1-sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com> <20260227164037.84110-3-sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20260227164037.84110-3-sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com> On Fri Feb 27, 2026 at 11:40 AM EST, Sun Jian wrote: > The perf_event subtest relies on SW_CPU_CLOCK sampling to trigger the BPF > program, but the current CPU burn loop can be too short on slower systems > and may fail to generate any overflow sample. This leaves pe_res unchange= d > and makes the test flaky. > > Make burn_cpu() take a loop count and use a longer burn only for the > perf_event subtest. Also scope perf_event_open() to the current task to > avoid wasting samples on unrelated activity. > > Tested: > ./test_progs -t bpf_cookie/perf_event -vv (30 runs): 0 failures > > Signed-off-by: Sun Jian Reviewed-by: Emil Tsalapatis Nit below, but change makes sense. > --- > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_cookie.c | 17 ++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_cookie.c b/tools/= testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_cookie.c > index 50f5e11e6e65..35adc3f6d443 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_cookie.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_cookie.c > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > #include > #include > #include > @@ -431,11 +432,12 @@ static void tp_subtest(struct test_bpf_cookie *skel= ) > bpf_link__destroy(link3); > } > =20 > -static void burn_cpu(void) > +static void burn_cpu(long loops) > { > - volatile int j =3D 0; > + long j =3D 0; Nit: AFAICT most of these changes are unnecessary, you could just bump the cycle count to 100M and add the barrier. Moving everything to longs and factoring out the loop count is unnecessary. > cpu_set_t cpu_set; > - int i, err; > + long i; > + int err; > =20 > /* generate some branches on cpu 0 */ > CPU_ZERO(&cpu_set); > @@ -443,9 +445,10 @@ static void burn_cpu(void) > err =3D pthread_setaffinity_np(pthread_self(), sizeof(cpu_set), &cpu_se= t); > ASSERT_OK(err, "set_thread_affinity"); > =20 > - /* spin the loop for a while (random high number) */ > - for (i =3D 0; i < 1000000; ++i) > + for (i =3D 0; i < loops; ++i) { > ++j; > + barrier(); > + } > } > =20 > static void pe_subtest(struct test_bpf_cookie *skel) > @@ -470,7 +473,7 @@ static void pe_subtest(struct test_bpf_cookie *skel) > if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "link1")) > goto cleanup; > =20 > - burn_cpu(); /* trigger BPF prog */ > + burn_cpu(100000000L); /* trigger BPF prog */ > =20 > ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->pe_res, 0x100000, "pe_res1"); > =20 > @@ -489,7 +492,7 @@ static void pe_subtest(struct test_bpf_cookie *skel) > if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "link2")) > goto cleanup; > =20 > - burn_cpu(); /* trigger BPF prog */ > + burn_cpu(100000000L); /* trigger BPF prog */ > =20 > ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->pe_res, 0x200000, "pe_res2"); > =20