On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 11:00:37PM +0000, Werner Kasselman wrote: > Add a tcpbpf sock_ops selftest that forces a same-register ctx->rtt_min read > on request_sock-backed callbacks and verifies the observed value is zero. > > This covers the dst_reg == src_reg path that the previous ctx_rewrite-only > test did not exercise.
Same formatting issue. > > Signed-off-by: Werner Kasselman <[email protected]> > --- > .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c | 4 ++++ > .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tcpbpf.h | 2 ++ > 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c > index 7e8fe1bad03f..1b08e49327d0 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c > @@ -42,6 +42,10 @@ static void verify_result(struct tcpbpf_globals *result) > /* check getsockopt for window_clamp */ > ASSERT_EQ(result->window_clamp_client, 9216, "window_clamp_client"); > ASSERT_EQ(result->window_clamp_server, 9216, "window_clamp_server"); > + > + /* check same-reg rtt_min read on request_sock-backed callbacks */ > + ASSERT_NEQ(result->rtt_min_req_seen, 0, "rtt_min_req_seen"); > + ASSERT_EQ(result->rtt_min_req_nonzero, 0, "rtt_min_req_nonzero"); > } > > static void run_test(struct tcpbpf_globals *result) > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c > index 6935f32eeb8f..a488b282b5dd 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c > @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ int bpf_testcb(struct bpf_sock_ops *skops) > { > char header[sizeof(struct ipv6hdr) + sizeof(struct tcphdr)]; > struct bpf_sock_ops *reuse = skops; > + long rtt_min = (long)skops; It is overly smart to test the same dst_reg == src_reg. A new test has just been added to test it in a cleaner way. pw-bot: cr You haven't spent time to take a look of the patches first. Please don't post again. I will stop reviewing your patches from now.
