On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 09:18:48AM -0600, Konstantin Shkolnyy wrote:

On 11/12/2024 02:58, Stefano Garzarella wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 07:17:26PM -0600, Konstantin Shkolnyy wrote:

quoted

Replace setsockopt() calls with calls to functions that follow
setsockopt() with getsockopt() and check that the returned value and its
size are the same as have been set.

Signed-off-by: Konstantin Shkolnyy <redacted>
---
tools/testing/vsock/Makefile              |   8 +-
tools/testing/vsock/control.c             |   8 +-
tools/testing/vsock/msg_zerocopy_common.c |   8 +-
tools/testing/vsock/util_socket.c         | 149 ++++++++++++++++++++++
tools/testing/vsock/util_socket.h         |  19 +++
tools/testing/vsock/vsock_perf.c          |  24 ++--
tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c          |  40 +++---
7 files changed, 208 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/vsock/util_socket.c
create mode 100644 tools/testing/vsock/util_socket.h

diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile b/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile
index 6e0b4e95e230..1ec0b3a67aa4 100644
--- a/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile

@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@

# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
all: test vsock_perf
test: vsock_test vsock_diag_test vsock_uring_test
-vsock_test: vsock_test.o vsock_test_zerocopy.o timeout.o 
control.o util.o msg_zerocopy_common.o
-vsock_diag_test: vsock_diag_test.o timeout.o control.o util.o
-vsock_perf: vsock_perf.o msg_zerocopy_common.o
+vsock_test: vsock_test.o vsock_test_zerocopy.o timeout.o 
control.o util.o msg_zerocopy_common.o util_socket.o
+vsock_diag_test: vsock_diag_test.o timeout.o control.o util.o 
util_socket.o
+vsock_perf: vsock_perf.o msg_zerocopy_common.o util_socket.o

I would add the new functions to check setsockopt in util.c

vsock_perf is more of a tool to measure performance than a test, so
we can avoid calling these checks there, tests should cover all
cases regardless of vsock_perf.

The problem is that vsock_perf calls enable_so_zerocopy() which has to
call the new setsockopt_int_check() because it's also called by 
vsock_test. Do you prefer to give vsock_perf its own version of
enable_so_zerocopy() which doesn't call setsockopt_int_check()?

Yeah, maybe we can move the old enable_so_zerocopy() in vsock_perf.c
and implement another enable_so_zerocopy() in util.c for the tests.

Thanks,
Stefano