perf test: Remove now useless failing sub test "BPF relocation checker"

For some time now the 'perf test 42: BPF filter' returns an error on bpf
relocation subtest, at least on x86 and s390. This is caused by

  d859900c4c56dc4f ("bpf, libbpf: support global data/bss/rodata sections")

which introduces support for global variables in eBPF programs.

Perf test 42.4 checks that the eBPF relocation fails when the eBPF program
contains a global variable. It returns OK when the eBPF program
could not be loaded and FAILED otherwise.

With above commit the test logic for the eBPF relocation is obsolete.
The loading of the eBPF now succeeds and the test always shows FAILED.

This patch removes the sub test completely.
Also a lot of eBPF program testing is done in the eBPF test suite,
it also contains tests for global variables.

Output before:
 42: BPF filter                          :
 42.1: Basic BPF filtering               : Ok
 42.2: BPF pinning                       : Ok
 42.3: BPF prologue generation           : Ok
 42.4: BPF relocation checker            : Failed
 #

Output after:
 # ./perf test -F 42
 42: BPF filter                          :
 42.1: Basic BPF filtering               : Ok
 42.2: BPF pinning                       : Ok
 42.3: BPF prologue generation           : Ok
 #

Signed-off-by: Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>
Suggested-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Sumanth Korikkar <sumanthk@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>
Link: http://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210324083734.1953123-1-tmricht@linux.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 8 deletions

diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c b/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c
index f57e075b0ed2..c72adbd67386 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/bpf.c
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ static struct {
 		.msg_load_fail	  = "check your vmlinux setting?",
 		.target_func	  = &epoll_pwait_loop,
 		.expect_result	  = (NR_ITERS + 1) / 2,
-		.pin 		  = true,
+		.pin		  = true,
 	},
 #ifdef HAVE_BPF_PROLOGUE
 	{
@@ -99,13 +99,6 @@ static struct {
 		.expect_result	  = (NR_ITERS + 1) / 4,
 	},
 #endif
-	{
-		.prog_id	  = LLVM_TESTCASE_BPF_RELOCATION,
-		.desc		  = "BPF relocation checker",
-		.name		  = "[bpf_relocation_test]",
-		.msg_compile_fail = "fix 'perf test LLVM' first",
-		.msg_load_fail	  = "libbpf error when dealing with relocation",
-	},
 };
 
 static int do_test(struct bpf_object *obj, int (*func)(void),