Hi! > The BPF tests registered 23 separate autotests. Collapse them into a > single bpf_autotest suite run by unit_test_suite_runner().
Some of these tests still don't pass with sanitizer enabled. With them registered individually there was an option to ignore these failures or only run the tests that are known to not contain UB. After lumping them in one suite running BPF tests under sanitizer is going to become much more difficult. There are other reasons why more granular tests are good, like ease of tracking or debugging failures. What are the benefits from collapsing them? What is the actual problem we are trying to solve? If DPDK CI is running out of tmpfs again, there is a proper fix for that. > Rename the old table-driven test_bpf() to test_bpf_progs() so that > test_bpf() can be the suite entry point. While having only one of the BPF tests called test_bpf was confusing, I'm not sure new name is more clear. > Move the #endif of the RTE_LIB_BPF guard to the end of the file. It > closed mid-file, leaving the stack, ELF, convert and atomic tests > outside the guard even though they all call rte_bpf functions. This guard is unnecessary and I already sent a patch to delete it.
