From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758579Ab2CBVXf (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Mar 2012 16:23:35 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:37474 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757763Ab2CBVXe (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Mar 2012 16:23:34 -0500 Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 13:23:32 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Stephen Boyd Cc: richard -rw- weinberger , Witold Baryluk , Thomas Gleixner , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Stanislaw Gruszka , Marcin Slusarz , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: ODEBUG: selftest warnings failed 4 != 5 (WARNING: at lib/debugobjects.c:908 check_results.constprop.9) Message-Id: <20120302132332.f5d28264.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <4F513995.6050509@codeaurora.org> References: <20120218023521.GB13538@smp.if.uj.edu.pl> <20120302131756.32e7f788.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4F513995.6050509@codeaurora.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 02 Mar 2012 13:20:21 -0800 Stephen Boyd wrote: > > Dunno, sorry. There are only two patches to bisect through - try > > reverting b84d435cc228e ("debugobjects: Extend to assert that an object > > is initialized") and then feac18dda25134 ("debugobjects: Be smarter > > about static objects")? > > The fix is in -mm. Can we send the patch to Linus directly? Or perhaps > go through Ingo since he sent the pull request in the first place? Oh, OK, I had that queued for Thomas to mull over. I'll send it in for 3.3. From: Stephen Boyd Subject: debugobjects: Fix selftest for static warnings debugobjects is now printing a warning when a fixup for a NOTAVAILABLE object is run. This causes the selftest to fail like: [ 0.000000] ODEBUG: selftest warnings failed 4 != 5 We could just increase the number of warnings that the selftest is expecting to see because that is actually what has changed. But, it turns out that fixup_activate() was written with inverted logic and thus a fixup for a static object returned 1 indicating the object had been fixed, and 0 otherwise. Fix the logic to be correct and update the counts to reflect that nothing needed fixing for a static object. Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd Reported-by: Thomas Gleixner Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton --- lib/debugobjects.c | 14 +++----------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff -puN lib/debugobjects.c~debugobjects-fix-selftest-for-static-warnings lib/debugobjects.c --- a/lib/debugobjects.c~debugobjects-fix-selftest-for-static-warnings +++ a/lib/debugobjects.c @@ -818,17 +818,9 @@ static int __init fixup_activate(void *a if (obj->static_init == 1) { debug_object_init(obj, &descr_type_test); debug_object_activate(obj, &descr_type_test); - /* - * Real code should return 0 here ! This is - * not a fixup of some bad behaviour. We - * merily call the debug_init function to keep - * track of the object. - */ - return 1; - } else { - /* Real code needs to emit a warning here */ + return 0; } - return 0; + return 1; case ODEBUG_STATE_ACTIVE: debug_object_deactivate(obj, &descr_type_test); @@ -967,7 +959,7 @@ static void __init debug_objects_selftes obj.static_init = 1; debug_object_activate(&obj, &descr_type_test); - if (check_results(&obj, ODEBUG_STATE_ACTIVE, ++fixups, warnings)) + if (check_results(&obj, ODEBUG_STATE_ACTIVE, fixups, warnings)) goto out; debug_object_init(&obj, &descr_type_test); if (check_results(&obj, ODEBUG_STATE_INIT, ++fixups, ++warnings)) _