Re: [PATCH bpf-next v8 6/7] selftests/bpf: add bpf_icmp_send kfunc tc tests
From: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org
Date: 2026-06-22 12:41:52
Also in:
bpf, netfilter-devel
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/icmp_send_kfunc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/icmp_send_kfunc.c index a5ac1a6ea77a..66447681f72d 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/icmp_send_kfunc.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/icmp_send_kfunc.c@@ -178,3 +178,28 @@ void test_icmp_send_unreach_cgroup(void) if (cgroup_fd >= 0) close(cgroup_fd); } + +void test_icmp_send_unreach_tc(void) +{ + LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tcx_opts, opts); + struct icmp_send *skel; + struct bpf_link *link = NULL; + + skel = icmp_send__open_and_load(); + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "skel_open")) + goto cleanup; + + link = bpf_program__attach_tcx(skel->progs.tc_egress, 1, &opts);
This isn't a bug, but would a named constant read more clearly here than
the bare ifindex literal 1? Looking at prog_tests/tc_change_tail.c, it
defines LO_IFINDEX for this same purpose, and prog_tests/tc_links.c
resolves the loopback interface via if_nametoindex("lo").
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "prog_attach"))
+ goto cleanup;
+
+ if (test__start_subtest("ipv4"))
+ run_icmp_test(skel, AF_INET, "127.0.0.1", NR_ICMP_UNREACH);
+
+ if (test__start_subtest("ipv6"))
+ run_icmp_test(skel, AF_INET6, "::1", ICMPV6_REJECT_ROUTE);
+
+cleanup:
+ bpf_link__destroy(link);
+ icmp_send__destroy(skel);
+}[ ... ] --- AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug. See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/27951892371