On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 10:30:29AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Uriel Guajardo <urielguajard...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Uriel Guajardo <urielguaja...@google.com>
> >
> > KUnit will fail tests upon observing a lockdep failure. Because lockdep
> > turns itself off after its first failure, only fail the first test and
> > warn users to not expect any future failures from lockdep.
> >
> > Similar to lib/locking-selftest [1], we check if the status of
> > debug_locks has changed after the execution of a test case. However, we
> > do not reset lockdep afterwards.
> >
> > Like the locking selftests, we also fix possible preemption count
> > corruption from lock bugs.
>
> > --- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
> > +++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
>
> > +void kunit_check_lockdep(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_lockdep
> > *lockdep) {
> > + int saved_preempt_count = lockdep->preempt_count;
> > + bool saved_debug_locks = lockdep->debug_locks;
> > +
> > + if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(preempt_count() != saved_preempt_count))
> > + preempt_count_set(saved_preempt_count);
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS
> > + if (softirq_count())
> > + current->softirqs_enabled = 0;
> > + else
> > + current->softirqs_enabled = 1;
> > +#endif
> > +
> > + if (saved_debug_locks && !debug_locks) {
> > + kunit_set_failure(test);
> > + kunit_warn(test, "Dynamic analysis tool failure from LOCKDEP.");
> > + kunit_warn(test, "Further tests will have LOCKDEP disabled.");
> > + }
>
>
> So this basically duplicates what the boot-time locking self-tests do,
> in a poor fashion?
No, it makes sure that any kunit based self-test fails when it messes up
it's locking.
