Commit 5181dc08 authored by Tiezhu Yang's avatar Tiezhu Yang Committed by Alexei Starovoitov

test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K

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: daabb2b0 ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: default avatarTiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Acked-by: default avatarYonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231207040851.19730-1-yangtiezhu@loongson.cnSigned-off-by: default avatarAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
parent 7d8ed51b
......@@ -6277,7 +6277,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
},
/* BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K off=1 (SMOD64) */
{
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1",
"ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, -7),
BPF_ALU64_IMM_OFF(BPF_MOD, R0, 2, 1),
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment