From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Trace Kernel <linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] tracing: Fix some selftest issues
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 11:37:21 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240531113721.c0314e0cdb3beb70c1a6ba7d@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3a7e679712fb47b6c75af84163b5d3ea252f4da9.camel@linux.intel.com>
On Wed, 29 May 2024 11:01:43 -0500
Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Masami,
>
> On Wed, 2024-05-29 at 08:38 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 May 2024 01:46:40 +0900
> > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 27 May 2024 19:29:07 -0400
> > > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, 26 May 2024 19:10:57 +0900
> > > > "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is a series of some fixes/improvements for the test
> > > > > modules and boot
> > > > > time selftest of kprobe events. I found a WARNING message with
> > > > > some boot
> > > > > time selftest configuration, which came from the combination of
> > > > > embedded
> > > > > kprobe generate API tests module and ftrace boot-time selftest.
> > > > > So the main
> > > > > problem is that the test module should not be built-in. But I
> > > > > also think
> > > > > this WARNING message is useless (because there are warning
> > > > > messages already)
> > > > > and the cleanup code is redundant. This series fixes those
> > > > > issues.
> > > >
> > > > Note, when I enable trace tests as builtin instead of modules, I
> > > > just
> > > > disable the bootup self tests when it detects this. This helps
> > > > with
> > > > doing tests via config options than having to add user space code
> > > > that
> > > > loads modules.
> > > >
> > > > Could you do something similar?
> > >
> > > OK, in that case, I would like to move the test cleanup code in
> > > module_exit function into the end of module_init function.
> > > It looks there is no reason to split those into 2 parts.
> >
> > Wait, I would like to hear Tom's opinion. I found following usage
> > comments
> > in the code.
> >
> > * Following that are a few examples using the created events to test
> > * various ways of tracing a synthetic event.
> > *
> > * To test, select CONFIG_SYNTH_EVENT_GEN_TEST and build the module.
> > * Then:
> > *
> > * # insmod kernel/trace/synth_event_gen_test.ko
> > * # cat /sys/kernel/tracing/trace
> > *
> > * You should see several events in the trace buffer -
> > * "create_synth_test", "empty_synth_test", and several instances of
> > * "gen_synth_test".
> > *
> > * To remove the events, remove the module:
> > *
> > * # rmmod synth_event_gen_test
> >
> > Tom, is that intended behavior ? and are you expected to reuse these
> > events outside of the module? e.g. load the test module and run some
> > test script in user space which uses those events?
> >
>
> Yeah, this module was meant as a sample module showing how to create
> and generate synthetic events in-kernel.
>
> So the interested user insmods the module, looks at the trace stream
> and sees, ok the events are there as expected, so it does work, great,
> let's remove the module to get rid of them and go write our own.
>
> Having both the creation and cleanup in module_init() wouldn't allow
> the user the opportunity to do that i.e. verify the results by reading
> the trace file.
So, in summary, it is designed to be a module. Steve, I think these tests
should be kept as modules. There are many reason to do so.
- This test is designed to be used as module.
- This can conflict with other boot time selftest if it is embedded.
- We can make these tests and boot time selftest mutable exclusive but
if we make these tests as modules, we can build and run both tests
safely.
- Embedding these tests leave new events when the kernel boot, which
user must be cleaned up by manual.
What would you think?
Thank you,
>
> Tom
>
> > As far as I can see, those tests are not intended to be embedded in
> > the
> > kernel because those are expected to be removed.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > >
> > > >
> > > > -- Steve
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you,
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) (3):
> > > > > tracing: Build event generation tests only as modules
> > > > > tracing/kprobe: Remove unneeded WARN_ON_ONCE() in
> > > > > selftests
> > > > > tracing/kprobe: Remove cleanup code unrelated to selftest
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
> >
> >
>
>
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-31 2:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-26 10:10 Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2024-05-26 10:11 ` [PATCH 1/3] tracing: Build event generation tests only as modules Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2024-05-26 10:11 ` [PATCH 2/3] tracing/kprobe: Remove unneeded WARN_ON_ONCE() in selftests Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2024-05-26 10:11 ` [PATCH 3/3] tracing/kprobe: Remove cleanup code unrelated to selftest Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
2024-05-27 23:29 ` [PATCH 0/3] tracing: Fix some selftest issues Steven Rostedt
2024-05-28 16:46 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2024-05-28 23:38 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2024-05-29 16:01 ` Tom Zanussi
2024-05-31 2:37 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2024-05-31 7:24 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-05-31 14:20 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2024-06-04 13:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-06-04 14:18 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2024-06-04 14:30 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-06-10 2:10 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2024-06-10 19:49 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-06-10 21:26 Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
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=20240531113721.c0314e0cdb3beb70c1a6ba7d@kernel.org \
--to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tom.zanussi@linux.intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®