Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:55:32 +0300 | From | "Ivan T. Ivanov" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1] arm64: Add initial set of stack unwinder self tests |
| |
Hi,
On 06-29 16:59, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 05:10:00PM +0300, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote: > > Add kunit tests for obvious cases where stack unwind could be needed. > > Like these: > > > > * Unwind a separate task > > * Unwind starting from caller > > * Unwind from irq context > > * Unwind from kprobe handler called via ftrace > > * Unwind from ftrace handler > > * Unwind through kretprobed function > > * Unwind from kretprobe handler > > > > Tests are completely based on code used in s390 unwinder tests. > > Cases which where not relevant to aarch64 where removed and > > some places where adjusted to address aarch64 specifics. > > I think this would be a bit easier to digest if it were a series which > builds things up with the test cases in individual patches, or at least > things like ftrace and kprobes split out a bit more, rather than every > single test all at once. I've got a few *very* superficial comments > below, I think the code is fine but there's several moving pieces to > check.
Ok. I will split and resend.
> > > +/* > > + * Calls test_arch_stack_walk() which is handy wrapper of aarch64 unwind > > + * functionality, and verifies that the result contains unwindme_func2 > > + *followed by unwindme_func1. > > Missing space.
Sure.
> > > + ret = register_ftrace_function(fops); > > + if (!ret) { > > + ret = test_unwind_ftraced_func(u); > > + unregister_ftrace_function(fops); > > + } else { > > + kunit_err(current_test, > > + "failed to register ftrace handler (%d)\n", ret); > > + } > > Shouldn't we return an error here?
Error will be returned once we remove test_unwind_ftraced_func address from ftrace filters.
Regards, Ivan
| |