> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_iter_memcg.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_iter_memcg.c
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_iter_memcg.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_iter_memcg.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -170,6 +180,8 @@ static void test_pgfault(struct bpf_link *link, struct
> memcg_query *memcg_query)
> if (!ASSERT_OK(read_stats(link), "read stats"))
> goto cleanup;
>
> + ASSERT_NEQ(memcg_query->pgfault, (unsigned long)-1,
> + "bpf_mem_cgroup_page_state PGFAULT");
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The assertion message references bpf_mem_cgroup_page_state(), but the BPF
program actually uses bpf_mem_cgroup_vm_events() to retrieve the pgfault
value:
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/cgroup_iter_memcg.c:
memcg_query.pgfault = bpf_mem_cgroup_vm_events(memcg, PGFAULT);
Should the message be "bpf_mem_cgroup_vm_events PGFAULT" instead?
---
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/21939182103
AI-authorship-score: low
AI-authorship-explanation: The commit message uses first-person narrative
describing a real back-porting scenario, and the code changes are simple
repetitive assertions typical of human-written test improvements.
issues-found: 1
issue-severity-score: low
issue-severity-explanation: Minor documentation issue where an assertion
message references the wrong BPF function name; does not affect test
correctness or system behavior.
