From: Hao Ge <hao.ge@linux.dev>
To: Abhishek Bapat <abhishekbapat@google.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Sourav Panda <souravpanda@google.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] kselftest: alloc_tag: extend the allocinfo ioctl kselftest
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2026 17:33:33 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c7ae2aa9-a1fb-4965-a213-f9cfb2aa101e@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d0a8308b4d0799876d24461a8ed9b5a71d3e1e89.1781042698.git.abhishekbapat@google.com>
Hi Abhishek
On 2026/6/10 08:12, Abhishek Bapat wrote:
> Add the following 2 scenarios to the allocinfo ioctl kselftest:
> 1. Validate size based filtering
> 2. Validate lineno based filtering
>
> The first test uses "do_init_module" as the candidate function for the
> test. This is because the associated site will only allocate memory when
> a kernel module is loaded. The return value of get_content_id() changes
> every time modules are loaded or unloaded. Hence, as long as
> get_content_id() values at the start and the end of the test are the
> same, the memory allocated by the do_init_module call site should also
> remain the same. Consequently, the test can assume consistency between
> the value returned by the ioctl and the procfs resulting in less
> flakiness.
>
> Signed-off-by: Abhishek Bapat <abhishekbapat@google.com>
> ---
> .../alloc_tag/allocinfo_ioctl_test.c | 204 +++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 203 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/alloc_tag/allocinfo_ioctl_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/alloc_tag/allocinfo_ioctl_test.c
> index cd9cf229ae1f..5d2f13900a47 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/alloc_tag/allocinfo_ioctl_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/alloc_tag/allocinfo_ioctl_test.c
> @@ -311,11 +311,201 @@ static int test_function_filter(void)
> return run_filter_test(&filter);
> }
>
> +static int test_size_filter(void)
> +{
> + int fd;
> + struct allocinfo_tag_data_vec *tags = malloc(sizeof(*tags));
> + struct allocinfo_tag_data_vec *procfs_entries = malloc(sizeof(*procfs_entries));
> + struct allocinfo_filter filter;
> + int ret = KSFT_PASS;
> + __u64 target_size, i, pos;
> + bool found;
> + const char *target_function = "do_init_module";
> + struct allocinfo_content_id start_cont_id, end_cont_id;
> + int retry = 0;
> + const int max_retries = 10;
> +
> + if (!tags || !procfs_entries) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Memory allocation failed.\n");
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto freemem;
> + }
> +
> + fd = open(ALLOCINFO_PROC, O_RDONLY);
> + if (fd < 0) {
> + ksft_exit_skip("Failed to open " ALLOCINFO_PROC ": %s\n", strerror(errno));
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto freemem;
> + }
> +
> + do {
> + found = false;
> + pos = 0;
> +
> + if (__allocinfo_get_content_id(fd, &start_cont_id)) {
> + ksft_print_msg("allocinfo_get_content_id failed\n");
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto exit;
> + }
> +
> + memset(&filter, 0, sizeof(filter));
> + filter.mask |= ALLOCINFO_FILTER_MASK_FUNCTION;
> + strncpy(filter.fields.function, target_function, ALLOCINFO_STR_SIZE);
> +
> + if (get_filtered_procfs_entries(procfs_entries, &filter, fd)) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Error retrieving entries from " ALLOCINFO_PROC "\n");
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto exit;
> + }
> +
As I mentioned for patch 5, the retry loop in test_size_filter calls
get_filtered_procfs_entries() which reads fd to EOF via fdopen/fgets.
If a module load triggers a retry, the second call to
get_filtered_procfs_entries() gets EOF
immediately.
And Sashiko has also reported several minor issues.
Thanks
Best Regards
Hao
> + if (procfs_entries->count == 0) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Function %s not found in procfs\n", target_function);
> + ret = KSFT_SKIP;
> + goto exit;
> + }
> +
> + target_size = procfs_entries->tag[0].counter.bytes;
> +
> + memset(&filter, 0, sizeof(filter));
> + filter.mask |= ALLOCINFO_FILTER_MASK_MIN_SIZE | ALLOCINFO_FILTER_MASK_MAX_SIZE;
> + filter.min_size = target_size;
> + filter.max_size = target_size;
> +
> + while (1) {
> + struct allocinfo_get_at get_at_params;
> +
> + memset(&get_at_params, 0, sizeof(get_at_params));
> + memcpy(&get_at_params.filter, &filter, sizeof(filter));
> + get_at_params.pos = pos;
> +
> + if (__allocinfo_get_at(fd, &get_at_params))
> + break;
> +
> + tags->count = 0;
> + memcpy(&tags->tag[tags->count++], &get_at_params.data,
> + sizeof(get_at_params.data));
> +
> + while (tags->count < VEC_MAX_ENTRIES &&
> + __allocinfo_get_next(fd, &tags->tag[tags->count]) == 0)
> + tags->count++;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < tags->count; i++) {
> + if (strcmp(tags->tag[i].tag.function, target_function) == 0) {
> + found = true;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (found || tags->count < VEC_MAX_ENTRIES)
> + break;
> +
> + pos += tags->count;
> + }
> +
> + if (__allocinfo_get_content_id(fd, &end_cont_id)) {
> + ksft_print_msg("allocinfo_get_content_id failed\n");
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto exit;
> + }
> +
> + if (start_cont_id.id == end_cont_id.id)
> + break;
> +
> + ksft_print_msg("Module load detected during size verification, retrying...\n");
> + } while (retry++ < max_retries);
> +
> + if (start_cont_id.id == end_cont_id.id && !found) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Entry with function %s not found in IOCTL results\n",
> + target_function);
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + }
> +
> +exit:
> + close(fd);
> +freemem:
> + free(tags);
> + free(procfs_entries);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int test_lineno_filter(void)
> +{
> + int fd;
> + struct allocinfo_tag_data_vec *tags = malloc(sizeof(*tags));
> + struct allocinfo_tag_data_vec *procfs_entries = malloc(sizeof(*procfs_entries));
> + struct allocinfo_filter filter;
> + enum ioctl_ret ioctl_status;
> + int ret = KSFT_PASS;
> + __u64 target_lineno, i;
> +
> + if (!tags || !procfs_entries) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Memory allocation failed.\n");
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto freemem;
> + }
> +
> + fd = open(ALLOCINFO_PROC, O_RDONLY);
> + if (fd < 0) {
> + ksft_exit_skip("Failed to open " ALLOCINFO_PROC ": %s\n", strerror(errno));
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto freemem;
> + }
> +
> + memset(&filter, 0, sizeof(filter));
> +
> + if (get_filtered_procfs_entries(procfs_entries, &filter, fd)) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Error retrieving entries from " ALLOCINFO_PROC "\n");
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto exit;
> + }
> + if (procfs_entries->count == 0) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Could not retrieve procfs entries\n");
> + ret = KSFT_SKIP;
> + goto exit;
> + }
> + /*
> + * We depend on the result of procfs entries to create the ioctl_filter. Hence we
> + * cannot recycle the run_filter_test function here.
> + */
> + target_lineno = procfs_entries->tag[0].tag.lineno;
> +
> + filter.mask |= ALLOCINFO_FILTER_MASK_LINENO;
> + filter.fields.lineno = target_lineno;
> +
> + ioctl_status = get_filtered_ioctl_entries(tags, &filter, fd, 0);
> + if (ioctl_status == IOCTL_INVALID_DATA) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Trouble retrieving valid IOCTL entries, skipping.\n");
> + ret = KSFT_SKIP;
> + goto exit;
> + }
> + if (ioctl_status == IOCTL_FAILURE) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Error retrieving IOCTL entries.\n");
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto exit;
> + }
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < tags->count; i++) {
> + if (tags->tag[i].tag.lineno != target_lineno) {
> + ksft_print_msg("IOCTL entry %llu has incorrect lineno %llu.\n",
> + i, tags->tag[i].tag.lineno);
> + ret = KSFT_FAIL;
> + goto exit;
> + }
> + }
> +
> +exit:
> + close(fd);
> +freemem:
> + free(tags);
> + free(procfs_entries);
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> int ret;
>
> - ksft_set_plan(2);
> + ksft_set_plan(4);
>
> ret = test_filename_filter();
> if (ret == KSFT_SKIP)
> @@ -329,5 +519,17 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> else
> ksft_test_result(ret == KSFT_PASS, "test_function_filter\n");
>
> + ret = test_size_filter();
> + if (ret == KSFT_SKIP)
> + ksft_test_result_skip("Skipping test_size_filter\n");
> + else
> + ksft_test_result(ret == KSFT_PASS, "test_size_filter\n");
> +
> + ret = test_lineno_filter();
> + if (ret == KSFT_SKIP)
> + ksft_test_result_skip("Skipping test_lineno_filter\n");
> + else
> + ksft_test_result(ret == KSFT_PASS, "test_lineno_filter\n");
> +
> ksft_finished();
> }
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-10 9:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-10 0:12 [PATCH v4 0/6] alloc_tag: introduce IOCTL-based filtering for MAP Abhishek Bapat
2026-06-10 0:12 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] alloc_tag: add ioctl to /proc/allocinfo Abhishek Bapat
2026-06-10 1:28 ` Hao Ge
2026-06-10 11:23 ` Usama Arif
2026-06-10 0:12 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] alloc_tag: add ioctl filters " Abhishek Bapat
2026-06-10 1:45 ` Hao Ge
2026-06-10 0:12 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] alloc_tag: add size-based filtering to ioctl Abhishek Bapat
2026-06-10 1:49 ` Hao Ge
2026-06-10 0:12 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] alloc_tag: add accuracy based " Abhishek Bapat
2026-06-10 1:52 ` Hao Ge
2026-06-10 0:12 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] kselftest: alloc_tag: add kselftest for ioctl interface Abhishek Bapat
2026-06-10 3:17 ` Hao Ge
2026-06-10 0:12 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] kselftest: alloc_tag: extend the allocinfo ioctl kselftest Abhishek Bapat
2026-06-10 9:33 ` Hao Ge [this message]
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=c7ae2aa9-a1fb-4965-a213-f9cfb2aa101e@linux.dev \
--to=hao.ge@linux.dev \
--cc=abhishekbapat@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=souravpanda@google.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
/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