2026年2月12日 16:50, [email protected] mailto:[email protected] 写到:
> > > > > 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? Good catch! I will fix it in the next version. Best, Hui > > --- > 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. >
