From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
"Maíra Canal" <mcanal@igalia.com>,
"Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Daniel Diaz" <daniel.diaz@linaro.org>,
"David Gow" <davidgow@google.com>,
"Arthur Grillo" <arthurgrillo@riseup.net>,
"Brendan Higgins" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
"Naresh Kamboju" <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
"Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
"Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
"Linux Kernel Functional Testing" <lkft@linaro.org>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/15] net: kunit: Suppress lock warning noise at end of dev_addr_lists tests
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 18:34:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240403183412.16254318@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240403131936.787234-7-linux@roeck-us.net>
On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 06:19:27 -0700 Guenter Roeck wrote:
> dev_addr_lists_test generates lock warning noise at the end of tests
> if lock debugging is enabled. There are two sets of warnings.
>
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 689 at kernel/locking/mutex.c:923 __mutex_unlock_slowpath.constprop.0+0x13c/0x368
> DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(__owner_task(owner) != __get_current())
>
> WARNING: kunit_try_catch/1336 still has locks held!
>
> KUnit test cleanup is not guaranteed to run in the same thread as the test
> itself. For this test, this means that rtnl_lock() and rtnl_unlock() may
> be called from different threads. This triggers the warnings.
> Suppress the warnings because they are irrelevant for the test and just
> confusing and distracting.
>
> The first warning can be suppressed by using START_SUPPRESSED_WARNING()
> and END_SUPPRESSED_WARNING() around the call to rtnl_unlock(). To suppress
> the second warning, it is necessary to set debug_locks_silent while the
> rtnl lock is held.
Is it okay if I move the locking into the tests, instead?
It's only 4 lines more and no magic required, seems to work fine.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-04 1:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-03 13:19 [PATCH v3 00/15] Add support for suppressing warning backtraces Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 01/15] bug/kunit: Core " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-09 8:29 ` David Gow
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 02/15] kunit: bug: Count suppressed " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-09 8:29 ` David Gow
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 03/15] kunit: Add test cases for backtrace warning suppression Guenter Roeck
2024-04-09 8:29 ` David Gow
2024-04-09 18:11 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 04/15] kunit: Add documentation for warning backtrace suppression API Guenter Roeck
2024-04-09 8:29 ` David Gow
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 05/15] drm: Suppress intentional warning backtraces in scaling unit tests Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 06/15] net: kunit: Suppress lock warning noise at end of dev_addr_lists tests Guenter Roeck
2024-04-04 1:34 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2024-04-08 16:34 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 07/15] x86: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 08/15] arm64: " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 09/15] loongarch: " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 10/15] parisc: " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 11/15] s390: " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 12/15] sh: " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 13/15] sh: Move defines needed " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-05 18:31 ` Simon Horman
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 14/15] riscv: Add support " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-22 17:40 ` Charlie Jenkins
2024-04-03 13:19 ` [PATCH v3 15/15] powerpc: " Guenter Roeck
2024-04-04 2:14 ` Michael Ellerman
2024-04-03 21:20 ` [PATCH v3 00/15] " Kees Cook
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240403183412.16254318@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=arthurgrillo@riseup.net \
--cc=brendan.higgins@linux.dev \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.diaz@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=lkft@linaro.org \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mcanal@igalia.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=naresh.kamboju@linaro.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
--cc=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).