Re: [RFC bpf-next 10/12] selftests/bpf: Add fentry tracing multi func test

[Jiri Olsa]

On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 10:13:55AM +0000, bot+bpf...@kernel.org wrote:
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/tracing_multi_check.c 
> > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/tracing_multi_check.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000..e5efa9884
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/tracing_multi_check.c
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > +   } else if (ip == &bpf_fentry_test3) {
> > +           char a, b;
>                       ^
> 
> The commit message states "We need to cast to real arguments types in
> multi_arg_check, because the checked value can be shorter than u64."
> 
> Should variable b be declared as int instead of char?
> 
> The kernel function signature is:
> 
>     noinline int bpf_fentry_test3(char a, int b, u64 c)
> 
> The second parameter is int, not char. While the test passes with the
> current test value of 5, this appears inconsistent with the stated goal
> of matching argument types.

yep, will fix


> 
> > +           __u64 c;
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > +   } else if (ip == &bpf_fentry_test6) {
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > +           e = (void*) value;;
> > +           if (bpf_get_func_arg(ctx, 5, &value))
> > +                   return;
> > +           f = value;;
>                       ^^
> 
> This isn't a bug, but there are extra semicolons on these two lines.

ok, thnx

jirka