Re: [PATCH v4 00/14] Add support for suppressing warning backtraces

Maxime Ripard
2025-03-13T18:03:43Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 992 bytes --]

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 10:17:49AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 11:43:15AM +0000, Alessandro Carminati wrote:
> > Some unit tests intentionally trigger warning backtraces by passing bad
> > parameters to kernel API functions. Such unit tests typically check the
> > return value from such calls, not the existence of the warning backtrace.
>
> Thanks for picking this series back up! I honestly thought this had
> already landed. :)
>
> > With CONFIG_KUNIT enabled, image size increase with this series applied is
> > approximately 1%. The image size increase (and with it the functionality
> > introduced by this series) can be avoided by disabling
> > CONFIG_KUNIT_SUPPRESS_BACKTRACE.
>
> Yeah, as with my prior review, I'm a fan of this. It makes a bunch of my
> very noisy tests much easier to deal with.

And for the record, we're also affected by this in DRM and would very
much like to get it merged in one shape or another.

Maxime

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]