On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 02:16:09AM IST, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:

On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 02:03:49AM IST, Song Liu wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 5:29 PM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Also, avoid using CO-RE features, as lskel doesn't support CO-RE, yet.
Create a file for testing libbpf skeleton as well, so that both
gen_loader and libbpf get tested.

Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>

[...]

quoted

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_weak_libbpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_weak_libbpf.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..b75725e28647
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_weak_libbpf.c

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+#include <test_progs.h>
+#include "test_ksyms_weak.skel.h"
+
+void test_ksyms_weak_libbpf(void)

This is (almost?) the same as test_weak_syms(), right? Why do we need both?

One includes lskel.h (light skeleton), the other includes skel.h (libbpf
skeleton). Trying to include both in the same file, it ends up redefining the
same struct. I am not sure whether adding a prefix/suffix to light skeleton
struct names is possible now, maybe through another option to bpftool in
addition to name?

Sorry, I misremembered. The name option is enough, it is because of how I did it
in the Makefile (using LSKELS_EXTRA).  I'll fix this in the next spin.

[...]

--
Kartikeya