Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 6 Dec 2023 23:03:52 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND bpf-next v1] test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K | From | Yonghong Song <> |
| |
On 12/6/23 11:08 PM, Tiezhu Yang wrote: > Currently, there are two test cases with same name > "ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right, > the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its > code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K. > > Before: > test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS > test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS > > After: > test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS > test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS > > Fixes: daabb2b098e0 ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions") > Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
| |