From: Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo <nums@google.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org,
alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, jolsa@redhat.com,
namhyung@kernel.org, songliubraving@fb.com, mbd@fb.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, irogers@google.com,
eranian@google.com, Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo <nums@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH] Fix perf-hooks test for sanitizers
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 14:59:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190708215928.167905-1-nums@google.com> (raw)
The perf-hooks test fails with Address Sanitizer and Memory
Sanitizer builds because it purposefully generates a segfault.
Checking if these sanitizers are active when running this test
will allow the perf-hooks test to pass.
This can be replicated by running (from the tip directory):
make -C tools/perf USE_CLANG=1 EXTRA_CFLAGS="-fsanitize=address \
-DADDRESS_SANITIZER=1"
then running tools/perf/perf test 55
Fix past to pass:
The raised signal was changed from SIGSEGV to SIGILL to get the test
to pass on our local machines which use clang 4.
Signed-off-by: Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo <nums@google.com>
---
tools/perf/tests/perf-hooks.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/perf-hooks.c b/tools/perf/tests/perf-hooks.c
index a693bcf017ea..3f5f4b28cf01 100644
--- a/tools/perf/tests/perf-hooks.c
+++ b/tools/perf/tests/perf-hooks.c
@@ -7,7 +7,14 @@
#include "util.h"
#include "perf-hooks.h"
-static void sigsegv_handler(int sig __maybe_unused)
+#if defined(ADDRESS_SANITIZER) || defined(MEMORY_SANITIZER) || \
+defined(THREAD_SANITIZER) || defined(SAFESTACK_SANITIZER)
+#define USE_SIGNAL 1
+#else
+#define USE_SIGNAL 0
+#endif
+
+static void signal_handler(int sig __maybe_unused)
{
pr_debug("SIGSEGV is observed as expected, try to recover.\n");
perf_hooks__recover();
@@ -25,6 +32,9 @@ static void the_hook(void *_hook_flags)
*hook_flags = 1234;
/* Generate a segfault, test perf_hooks__recover */
+#if USE_SIGNAL
+ raise(SIGILL);
+#endif
*p = 0;
}
@@ -32,7 +42,7 @@ int test__perf_hooks(struct test *test __maybe_unused, int subtest __maybe_unuse
{
int hook_flags = 0;
- signal(SIGSEGV, sigsegv_handler);
+ signal(USE_SIGNAL ? SIGILL : SIGSEGV, signal_handler);
perf_hooks__set_hook("test", the_hook, &hook_flags);
perf_hooks__invoke_test();
--
2.22.0.410.gd8fdbe21b5-goog
next reply other threads:[~2019-07-08 21:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-08 21:59 Numfor Mbiziwo-Tiapo [this message]
2019-07-09 0:49 ` [PATCH] Fix perf-hooks test for sanitizers Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
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=20190708215928.167905-1-nums@google.com \
--to=nums@google.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbd@fb.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.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