On 2026/4/8 12:55 [email protected] write: > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/exceptions.c > > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/exceptions.c > > index 84ab73e08b0e6..94a62fcd4543d 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/exceptions.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/exceptions.c > > @@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ static void test_exceptions_success(void) > > > > bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.exception_ext_mod_cb_runtime), > > "exception_cb_mod"), "set_attach_target")) > > goto done; > > - }), "FENTRY/FEXIT programs cannot attach to exception callback", 0); > > + }), "FENTRY/FEXIT/FSESSION programs cannot attach to exception > > callback", 0); > > These four selftest locations now expect the string > "FENTRY/FEXIT/FSESSION programs cannot attach to exception callback", > but the verifier message they match against was not updated. In > bpf_check_attach_target() the format string still reads: > > prog_extension ? "Extension" : "FENTRY/FEXIT");
You are right, I missed this part. I'll update it in the V2. Thanks! Menglong Dong > > so the kernel produces "FENTRY/FEXIT programs cannot attach to > exception callback". The RUN_EXT macro uses strstr() to match the > expected string against the kernel log buffer, and since > "FENTRY/FEXIT/FSESSION" is not a substring of "FENTRY/FEXIT programs", > strstr() returns NULL and the ASSERT_OK_PTR fails. > > Should the verifier message also be updated to include FSESSION, to > match the selftest expectation? As it stands these four subtests will > fail. > > > [ ... ] > > > --- > 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/24117471086
