Re: ipv4/tcp.c:4234:1: error: the frame size of 1152 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]

[Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>]

On 9/8/21 3:24 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 10:16 AM Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 9/8/21 11:05 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 4:12 PM Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>>> On 9/7/21 5:14 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>>>> The KUNIT macros create all these individually reasonably small
>>>>> initialized structures on stack, and when you have more than a small
>>>>> handful of them the KUNIT infrastructure just makes the stack space
>>>>> explode. Sometimes the compiler will be able to re-use the stack
>>>>> slots, but it seems to be an iffy proposition to depend on it - it
>>>>> seems to be a combination of luck and various config options.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have been concerned about these macros creeping in for a while.
>>>> I will take a closer look and work with Brendan to come with a plan
>>>> to address it.
>>>
>>> I've previously sent patches to turn off the structleak plugin for
>>> any kunit test file to work around this, but only a few of those patches
>>> got merged and new files have been added since. It would
>>> definitely help to come up with a proper fix, but my structleak-disable
>>> hack should be sufficient as a quick fix.
>>>
>>
>> Looks like these are RFC patches and the discussion went cold. Let's pick
>> this back up and we can make progress.
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAFd5g45+JqKDqewqz2oZtnphA-_0w62FdSTkRs43K_NJUgnLBg@mail.gmail.com/
> 
> I can try to get the patch reapplying and send it out (I just figured
> that Arnd or Kees would want to send it out :-)  since it was your
> idea).
> 

Brendan,

Would you like to send me the fix with Suggested-by for Arnd or Kees?

thanks,
-- Shuah