On 12/12, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:27:24AM -0800, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > The following prog types don't make sense without bpf cgroup:
> > * BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SKB
> > * BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SOCK
> > * BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SOCK_ADDR
> >
> > Skip running verifier tests that exercise these prog types if
> > kernel is built without proper support.
> >
> > See commit e5c504858a18 ("selftests/bpf: skip verifier sockmap tests
> > on kernels without support") for original motivation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <s...@google.com>
> > ---
> > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > index f5015566ae1b..b5470a399996 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@
> > /* fallback to all features enabled */
> > # define CONFIG_BPF_STREAM_PARSER 1
> > # define CONFIG_XDP_SOCKETS 1
> > +# define CONFIG_CGROUP_BPF 1
>
> I really don't like where these is going.
> I think previous set should be reverted.
> This is not a scalable approach.
> Use libbpf probing approach to check whether feature is present instead.
I can probably add runtime probing instead of depending on compile-time
config, but I think that we would still need some per-test mechanism
to say that it depends on feature X (per-test .config_disabled or
similar).
Will moving these checks to runtime address your concern? (there is sill a
scalability issue though)
