From: David Gow <david@davidgow.net>
To: Albert Esteve <aesteve@redhat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
Rae Moar <raemoar63@gmail.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@ffwll.ch>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Paul Walmsley <pjw@kernel.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Alexandre Ghiti <alex@ghiti.fr>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
Alessandro Carminati <acarmina@redhat.com>,
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/4] kunit: Add backtrace suppression self-tests
Date: Wed, 6 May 2026 17:38:46 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <240b1b10-61f3-4e14-8312-dea1ade5bc59@davidgow.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260504-kunit_add_support-v8-2-3e5957cdd235@redhat.com>
Le 04/05/2026 à 3:41 PM, Albert Esteve a écrit :
> From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>
> Add unit tests to verify that warning backtrace suppression works.
>
> Tests cover all three API forms:
> - Scoped: kunit_warning_suppress() with in-block count verification
> and post-block inactivity check.
> - Manual macros: KUNIT_START/END_SUPPRESSED_WARNING() with WARN()
> and WARN_ON(), both direct and through helper functions, as well
> as multiple warnings in a single block.
> - Direct functions: kunit_start/end_suppress_warning() with
> sequential independent suppression blocks and per-block counts.
>
> Furthermore, tests verify incremental warning counting, that
> kunit_has_active_suppress_warning() transitions correctly around
> suppression boundaries, and that suppression active in the test
> kthread does not leak to a separate kthread.
>
> If backtrace suppression does _not_ work, the unit tests will likely
> trigger unsuppressed backtraces, which should actually help to get
> the affected architectures / platforms fixed.
>
> Tested-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
> Acked-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
> Signed-off-by: Alessandro Carminati <acarmina@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: David Gow <david@davidgow.net>
> Signed-off-by: Albert Esteve <aesteve@redhat.com>
> ---
Looks good to me, thanks!
This is still:
Reviewed-by: David Gow <david@davidgow.net>
Cheers,
-- David
> lib/kunit/Makefile | 1 +
> lib/kunit/backtrace-suppression-test.c | 184 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 185 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/Makefile b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> index 4592f9d0aa8dd..2e8a6b71a2ab0 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ obj-$(if $(CONFIG_KUNIT),y) += hooks.o
>
> obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) += kunit-test.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) += platform-test.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) += backtrace-suppression-test.o
>
> # string-stream-test compiles built-in only.
> ifeq ($(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST),y)
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/backtrace-suppression-test.c b/lib/kunit/backtrace-suppression-test.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..0e6fb685d2cbb
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/kunit/backtrace-suppression-test.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,184 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * KUnit test for suppressing warning tracebacks.
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2024, Guenter Roeck
> + * Author: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
> + */
> +
> +#include <kunit/test.h>
> +#include <linux/bug.h>
> +#include <linux/completion.h>
> +#include <linux/kthread.h>
> +
> +static void backtrace_suppression_test_warn_direct(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + kunit_warning_suppress(test) {
> + WARN(1, "This backtrace should be suppressed");
> + /*
> + * Count must be checked inside the scope; the handle
> + * is not accessible after the block exits.
> + */
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_SUPPRESSED_WARNING_COUNT(test, 1);
> + }
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, kunit_has_active_suppress_warning());
> +}
> +
> +static void trigger_backtrace_warn(void)
> +{
> + WARN(1, "This backtrace should be suppressed");
> +}
> +
> +static void backtrace_suppression_test_warn_indirect(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + KUNIT_START_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> + trigger_backtrace_warn();
> + KUNIT_END_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_SUPPRESSED_WARNING_COUNT(test, 1);
> +}
> +
> +static void backtrace_suppression_test_warn_multi(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + KUNIT_START_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> + WARN(1, "This backtrace should be suppressed");
> + trigger_backtrace_warn();
> + KUNIT_END_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_SUPPRESSED_WARNING_COUNT(test, 2);
> +}
> +
> +static void backtrace_suppression_test_warn_on_direct(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE) && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KALLSYMS))
> + kunit_skip(test, "requires CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE or CONFIG_KALLSYMS");
> +
> + KUNIT_START_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> + WARN_ON(1);
> + KUNIT_END_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_SUPPRESSED_WARNING_COUNT(test, 1);
> +}
> +
> +static void trigger_backtrace_warn_on(void)
> +{
> + WARN_ON(1);
> +}
> +
> +static void backtrace_suppression_test_warn_on_indirect(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE))
> + kunit_skip(test, "requires CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE");
> +
> + KUNIT_START_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> + trigger_backtrace_warn_on();
> + KUNIT_END_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_SUPPRESSED_WARNING_COUNT(test, 1);
> +}
> +
> +static void backtrace_suppression_test_count(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + KUNIT_START_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_SUPPRESSED_WARNING_COUNT(test, 0);
> +
> + WARN(1, "suppressed");
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_SUPPRESSED_WARNING_COUNT(test, 1);
> +
> + WARN(1, "suppressed again");
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_SUPPRESSED_WARNING_COUNT(test, 2);
> +
> + KUNIT_END_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> +}
> +
> +static void backtrace_suppression_test_active_state(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, kunit_has_active_suppress_warning());
> +
> + KUNIT_START_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, kunit_has_active_suppress_warning());
> + KUNIT_END_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, kunit_has_active_suppress_warning());
> +
> + kunit_warning_suppress(test) {
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, kunit_has_active_suppress_warning());
> + }
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, kunit_has_active_suppress_warning());
> +}
> +
> +static void backtrace_suppression_test_multi_scope(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct kunit_suppressed_warning *sw1, *sw2;
> +
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE))
> + kunit_skip(test, "requires CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE");
> +
> + sw1 = kunit_start_suppress_warning(test);
> + trigger_backtrace_warn_on();
> + WARN(1, "suppressed by sw1");
> + kunit_end_suppress_warning(test, sw1);
> +
> + sw2 = kunit_start_suppress_warning(test);
> + WARN(1, "suppressed by sw2");
> + kunit_end_suppress_warning(test, sw2);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, kunit_suppressed_warning_count(sw1), 2);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, kunit_suppressed_warning_count(sw2), 1);
> +}
> +
> +struct cross_kthread_data {
> + bool was_active;
> + struct completion done;
> +};
> +
> +static int cross_kthread_fn(void *data)
> +{
> + struct cross_kthread_data *d = data;
> +
> + d->was_active = kunit_has_active_suppress_warning();
> + complete(&d->done);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void backtrace_suppression_test_cross_kthread(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct cross_kthread_data data;
> + struct task_struct *task;
> +
> + init_completion(&data.done);
> +
> + KUNIT_START_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> +
> + task = kthread_run(cross_kthread_fn, &data, "kunit-cross-test");
> + KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE(test, IS_ERR(task));
> + wait_for_completion(&data.done);
> +
> + KUNIT_END_SUPPRESSED_WARNING(test);
> +
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, data.was_active);
> +}
> +
> +static struct kunit_case backtrace_suppression_test_cases[] = {
> + KUNIT_CASE(backtrace_suppression_test_warn_direct),
> + KUNIT_CASE(backtrace_suppression_test_warn_indirect),
> + KUNIT_CASE(backtrace_suppression_test_warn_multi),
> + KUNIT_CASE(backtrace_suppression_test_warn_on_direct),
> + KUNIT_CASE(backtrace_suppression_test_warn_on_indirect),
> + KUNIT_CASE(backtrace_suppression_test_count),
> + KUNIT_CASE(backtrace_suppression_test_active_state),
> + KUNIT_CASE(backtrace_suppression_test_multi_scope),
> + KUNIT_CASE(backtrace_suppression_test_cross_kthread),
> + {}
> +};
> +
> +static struct kunit_suite backtrace_suppression_test_suite = {
> + .name = "backtrace-suppression-test",
> + .test_cases = backtrace_suppression_test_cases,
> +};
> +kunit_test_suites(&backtrace_suppression_test_suite);
> +
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("KUnit test to verify warning backtrace suppression");
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-06 9:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-04 7:41 [PATCH v8 0/4] kunit: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces Albert Esteve
2026-05-04 7:41 ` [PATCH v8 1/4] bug/kunit: Core " Albert Esteve
2026-05-06 9:38 ` David Gow
2026-05-06 10:11 ` Albert Esteve
2026-05-04 7:41 ` [PATCH v8 2/4] kunit: Add backtrace suppression self-tests Albert Esteve
2026-05-06 9:38 ` David Gow [this message]
2026-05-04 7:41 ` [PATCH v8 3/4] drm: Suppress intentional warning backtraces in scaling unit tests Albert Esteve
2026-05-04 10:03 ` Maxime Ripard
2026-05-06 8:37 ` Albert Esteve
2026-05-06 9:38 ` David Gow
2026-05-06 9:48 ` Maxime Ripard
2026-05-04 7:41 ` [PATCH v8 4/4] kunit: Add documentation for warning backtrace suppression API Albert Esteve
2026-05-06 9:38 ` David Gow
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=240b1b10-61f3-4e14-8312-dea1ade5bc59@davidgow.net \
--to=david@davidgow.net \
--cc=acarmina@redhat.com \
--cc=aesteve@redhat.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex@ghiti.fr \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=brendan.higgins@linux.dev \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=lkft@linaro.org \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjw@kernel.org \
--cc=raemoar63@gmail.com \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
--cc=workflows@vger.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