On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 4:22 PM Daniel Xu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 01:33:09PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 11:46 AM Daniel Xu wrote:
> > >
> > > Switching to vmlinux.h definitions seems to make the verifier very
> > > unhappy with bitfield accesses. The erro
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 11:47 AM Hangbin Liu wrote:
>
> In the PMTU test, when all previous tests are skipped and the new test
> passes, the exit code is set to 0. However, the current check mistakenly
> treats this as an assignment, causing the check to pass every time.
>
> Consequently, regardle
[ Adding Masami and stable ]
On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 00:27:07 +
Beau Belgrave wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 05:31:51PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:42:23 -0400
> > Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > > > I still get the splat about the trace_array_put when running
> >
In the PMTU test, when all previous tests are skipped and the new test
passes, the exit code is set to 0. However, the current check mistakenly
treats this as an assignment, causing the check to pass every time.
Consequently, regardless of how many tests have failed, if the latest test
passes, the
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 05:31:51PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:42:23 -0400
> Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > > I still get the splat about the trace_array_put when running
> > > user_event's ftrace selftest:
> > >
> > > [ 26.665931] [ cut here ]
>
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:42:23 -0400
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > I still get the splat about the trace_array_put when running
> > user_event's ftrace selftest:
> >
> > [ 26.665931] [ cut here ]
> > [ 26.63] WARNING: CPU: 12 PID: 291 at kernel/trace/trace.c:516
> > tr
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:35 PM Peter Xu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 01:22:02PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > > +static int adjust_page_size(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + page_size = default_huge_page_size();
> > >
> > > This is hacky too, currently page_size is the real page_size
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 01:22:02PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > +static int adjust_page_size(void)
> > > +{
> > > + page_size = default_huge_page_size();
> >
> > This is hacky too, currently page_size is the real page_size backing the
> > memory.
> >
> > To make thp test simple, maybe
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 1:14 PM Peter Xu wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 05:38:15PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > Add tests for new UFFDIO_MOVE ioctl which uses uffd to move source
> > into destination buffer while checking the contents of both after
> > the move. After the operation the
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 05:38:11PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> From: Andrea Arcangeli
>
> For now, folio_move_anon_rmap() was only used to move a folio to a
> different anon_vma after fork(), whereby the root anon_vma stayed
> unchanged. For that, it was sufficient to hold the folio lock w
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 05:38:13PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> uffd_test_ctx_clear() is being called from uffd_test_ctx_init() to unmap
> areas used in the previous test run. This approach is problematic because
> while unmapping areas uffd_test_ctx_clear() uses page_size and nr_pages
> whic
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 05:38:15PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> Add tests for new UFFDIO_MOVE ioctl which uses uffd to move source
> into destination buffer while checking the contents of both after
> the move. After the operation the content of the destination buffer
> should match the origi
Acked-by: Kui-Feng Lee
On 10/27/23 22:24, Yuran Pereira wrote:
Since some malloc calls in bpf_iter may at times fail,
this patch adds the appropriate fail checks, and ensures that
any previously allocated resource is appropriately destroyed
before returning the function.
Signed-off-by: Yuran P
Acked-by: Kui-Feng Lee
On 10/27/23 22:24, Yuran Pereira wrote:
As it was pointed out by Yonghong Song [1], in the bpf selftests the use
of the ASSERT_* series of macros is preferred over the CHECK macro.
This patch replaces all CHECK calls in bpf_iter with the appropriate
ASSERT_* macros.
[1]
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 07:08:48PM +0100, Joey Gouly wrote:
> Teach the signal frame parsing about the new POE frame, avoids warning when it
> is generated.
Reviewed-by: Mark Brown
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 07:08:47PM +0100, Joey Gouly wrote:
> + {
> + .name = "POE",
> + .at_hwcap = AT_HWCAP2,
> + .hwcap_bit = HWCAP2_POE,
> + .cpuinfo = "poe",
> + .sigill_fn = poe_sigill,
> + },
We should set sigill_reliable
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 07:08:41PM +0100, Joey Gouly wrote:
> Add PKEY support to signals, by saving and restoring POR_EL0 from the
> stackframe.
Reviewed-by: Mark Brown
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 11:39:17AM +, szabolcs.n...@arm.com wrote:
The 10/27/2023 16:24, Deepak Gupta wrote:
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 12:49:59PM +0100, szabolcs.n...@arm.com wrote:
> no. the lifetime is the issue: a stack in principle can outlive
> a thread and resumed even after the original
> > [..]
> > > +/*
> > > +* lru functions
> > > +**/
> > > +static bool zswap_lru_add(struct list_lru *list_lru, struct zswap_entry
> > > *entry)
> > > +{
> > > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg = get_mem_cgroup_from_entry(entry);
> >
The sockets used by udpgso_bench_tx aren't always ready when
udpgso_bench_tx transmits packets. This issue is more prevalent in -rt
kernels, but can occur in both. Replace the hacky sleep calls with a
function that checks whether the ports in the namespace are ready for
use.
Suggested-by: Paolo Ab
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 12:42:23PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 09:31:02 -0700
> Beau Belgrave wrote:
>
> > I applied both [1][2] patches, and I no longer get any panics. However,
>
> Great! Can I add "Tested-by" from you on those patches?
>
Yep, please do.
> > I still g
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 09:31:02 -0700
Beau Belgrave wrote:
> I applied both [1][2] patches, and I no longer get any panics. However,
Great! Can I add "Tested-by" from you on those patches?
> I still get the splat about the trace_array_put when running
> user_event's ftrace selftest:
>
> [ 26.66
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 10:33:44PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 18:36:40 -0400
> Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 12:20:11 -0700
> > Beau Belgrave wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 05:38:41PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > > > Following kernel cra
On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 5:46 PM Hangbin Liu wrote:
>
> In the PMTU test, when all previous tests are skipped and the new test
> passes, the exit code is set to 0. However, the current check mistakenly
> treats this as an assignment, causing the check to pass every time.
>
> Consequently, regardles
The 10/27/2023 16:24, Deepak Gupta wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 12:49:59PM +0100, szabolcs.n...@arm.com wrote:
> > no. the lifetime is the issue: a stack in principle can outlive
> > a thread and resumed even after the original thread exited.
> > for that to work the shadow stack has to outlive
Move the call to kunit_suite_has_succeeded() after the check that
the kunit_suite pointer is valid.
This was found by smatch:
lib/kunit/debugfs.c:66 debugfs_print_results() warn: variable
dereferenced before check 'suite' (see line 63)
Signed-off-by: Richard Fitzgerald
Reported-by: Dan Carpen
Check the stream pointer passed to string_stream_destroy() for
IS_ERR_OR_NULL() instead of only NULL.
Whatever alloc_string_stream() returns should be safe to pass
to string_stream_destroy(), and that will be an ERR_PTR.
It's obviously good practise and generally helpful to also check
for NULL po
In kunit_debugfs_create_suite() give up and skip creating the debugfs
file if any of the alloc_string_stream() calls return an error or NULL.
Only put a value in the log pointer of kunit_suite and kunit_test if it
is a valid pointer to a log.
This prevents the potential invalid dereference reporte
On Mon, 2023-10-30 at 10:08 +, David Laight wrote:
> From: David Woodhouse
> > Sent: 30 October 2023 09:46
> >
> > On Sun, 2023-10-29 at 21:13 +, David Laight wrote:
> > > From: David Woodhouse
> > > > Sent: 28 October 2023 20:35
> > > >
> > > > Using -MD without -MP causes build failures
From: David Woodhouse
> Sent: 30 October 2023 09:46
>
> On Sun, 2023-10-29 at 21:13 +, David Laight wrote:
> > From: David Woodhouse
> > > Sent: 28 October 2023 20:35
> > >
> > > Using -MD without -MP causes build failures when a header file is deleted
> > > or moved. With -MP, the compiler wi
In the PMTU test, when all previous tests are skipped and the new test
passes, the exit code is set to 0. However, the current check mistakenly
treats this as an assignment, causing the check to pass every time.
Consequently, regardless of how many tests have failed, if the latest test
passes, the
On Sun, 2023-10-29 at 21:13 +, David Laight wrote:
> From: David Woodhouse
> > Sent: 28 October 2023 20:35
> >
> > Using -MD without -MP causes build failures when a header file is deleted
> > or moved. With -MP, the compiler will emit phony targets for the header
> > files it lists as depende
We have started printing more and more intentional stack traces. Whether
it's testing KASAN is able to detect use after frees or it's part of a
kunit test.
These stack traces can be problematic. They suddenly show up as a new
failure. Now the test team has to contact the developers. A bunch of
Hi Bernd,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on kees/for-next/execve]
[also build test WARNING on kees/for-next/seccomp shuah-kselftest/next
shuah-kselftest/fixes linus/master v6.6]
[cannot apply to next-20231030]
[If your patch is applied to the
ecret" run_test ./memfd_secret
# KSM KSM_MERGE_TIME_HUGE_PAGES test with size of 100
---
base-commit: ffc253263a1375a65fa6c9f62a893e9767fbebfa
change-id: 20231030-selftest-c75b1b460817
Best regards,
--
Itaru Kitayama
35 matches
Mail list logo
