Hi Heinrich, On Sat, 20 Dec 2025 at 18:59, Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > test/py/tests/test_trace.py expects a recorded call depth in excess of 30. > bootefi hello has a call depth of 42. > efi_selftest_block_device.c reaches 56. > > Let's increase the default for TRACE_CALL_DEPTH_LIMIT to 100.
We can do this, but it will explode the size of the trace buffer. Do you know what the function call stack looks like in this case? > > Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]> > --- > lib/Kconfig | 2 +- > test/py/tests/test_trace.py | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/Kconfig b/lib/Kconfig > index fe0b878a206..3f175fde7b1 100644 > --- a/lib/Kconfig > +++ b/lib/Kconfig > @@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ config TRACE_BUFFER_SIZE > config TRACE_CALL_DEPTH_LIMIT > int "Trace call depth limit" > depends on TRACE > - default 15 > + default 100 > help > Sets the maximum call depth up to which function calls are recorded. > > diff --git a/test/py/tests/test_trace.py b/test/py/tests/test_trace.py > index 52d6ec6e5d2..7f897e4c366 100644 > --- a/test/py/tests/test_trace.py > +++ b/test/py/tests/test_trace.py > @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ def collect_trace(ubman): > assert int(vals['maximum observed call depth']) > 30 > assert (vals['call depth limit'] == > ubman.config.buildconfig.get('config_trace_call_depth_limit')) > - assert int(vals['calls not traced due to depth']) > 100000 > + # 'calls not traced due to depth' depends on configuration. Don't check > it. > > out = ubman.run_command('bootstage report') > # Accumulated time: > -- > 2.51.0 > Regards, Simon
