From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: "Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
David Gow <davidgow@google.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] printk: kunit: support offstack cpumask
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 15:51:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aG_FbyF2HujeHfcw@pathway.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250709144706-efda2e7c-c3e4-4905-91ad-7553c46ed2e2@linutronix.de>
On Wed 2025-07-09 14:53:29, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 01:36:14PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Tue 2025-07-08 16:48:47, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 8, 2025, at 16:24, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > > On Wed 2025-07-02 13:28:35, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > >> On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 11:51:56AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks a lot for the nice report.
> > > >
> > > > The problem is how cpumask_var_t is defined in include/linux/cpumask_types.h:
> > > >
> > > > #ifdef CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK
> > > > typedef struct cpumask *cpumask_var_t;
> > > > #else
> > > > typedef struct cpumask cpumask_var_t[1];
> > > > #endif /* CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK */
> > > >
> > > > And KUNIT_DEFINE_ACTION_WRAPPER() expect that the 3rd parameter
> > > > is a pointer.
> > > >
> > > > I am going to solve this by adding a wrapper over free_cpumask_var()
> > > > which would work with a pointer to cpumask_var_t.
> > >
> > > I'm not familiar enough with the cleanup mechanism of kunit,
> > > but can't you just move the mask allocation outside of
> > > test_readerwriter()?
> >
> > The only solution would be global variable.
>
> When the cpumask is allocated on the stack, free_cpumask_var() is a no-op.
> So while the stack address would be leaked to another thread,
> it should be fine as nothing is ever done with it.
> For more clarity it could also be gated explicitly:
>
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK)) {
> err = kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, prbtest_cpumask_cleanup, test_cpus);
> KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
> }
It is likely a matter of taste but I like this idea. It looks better
than passing an invalid pointer and hope nobody would do anything
with it.
The only problem is that
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK)) {
did not prevented the compiler warning. I guess that the code was still
compiled and later just optimized out.
So, I am going to use #ifdef instead. I create a function:
/*
* A cast would be needed for the clean up action when the cpumask was on stack.
* Also it would leak the stack address to the cleanup thread.
* And alloc_cpu_mask() and free_cpumask_var() would do nothing anyway.
*/
#ifdef CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK
KUNIT_DEFINE_ACTION_WRAPPER(prbtest_cpumask_cleanup, free_cpumask_var, cpumask_var_t);
static void prbtest_alloc_cpumask(struct kunit *test, cpumask_var_t *mask)
{
int err;
KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, alloc_cpumask_var(mask, GFP_KERNEL));
err = kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, prbtest_cpumask_cleanup, *mask);
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
}
#else
static inline
void prbtest_alloc_cpumask(struct kunit *test, cpumask_var_t *mask) {}
#endif
which will be called in test_readerwriter().
It seems to work, ..., sigh. I did not expect so many troubles with
a tiny detail.
Best Regards,
Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-10 13:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-02 9:51 [PATCH 0/3] printk: KUnit: Followup fixes for the new KUnit test Petr Mladek
2025-07-02 9:51 ` [PATCH 1/3] printk: ringbuffer: Explain why the KUnit test ignores failed writes Petr Mladek
2025-07-04 11:28 ` John Ogness
2025-07-02 9:51 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: kunit: support offstack cpumask Petr Mladek
2025-07-02 20:28 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-07-08 14:24 ` Petr Mladek
2025-07-08 14:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-07-09 11:36 ` Petr Mladek
2025-07-09 12:53 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-07-10 13:51 ` Petr Mladek [this message]
2025-07-10 14:08 ` Arnd Bergmann
2025-09-02 13:55 ` Petr Mladek
2025-07-03 14:36 ` kernel test robot
2025-07-02 9:51 ` [PATCH 3/3] printk: kunit: Fix __counted_by() in struct prbtest_rbdata Petr Mladek
2025-07-04 11:41 ` John Ogness
2025-07-02 15:48 ` [PATCH 0/3] printk: KUnit: Followup fixes for the new KUnit test Thomas Weißschuh
2025-07-10 15:29 ` Petr Mladek
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=aG_FbyF2HujeHfcw@pathway.suse.cz \
--to=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=arnd@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
--cc=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
/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