mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Gow <david@davidgow.net>
To: "Eric Biggers" <ebiggers@kernel.org>,
	"Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/crypto: tests: polyval_kunit: Increase iterations for preparekey in IRQs
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2026 19:53:07 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3527d9cb-9982-4302-a9ca-d7ac2a10ccaf@davidgow.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260102182748.GB2294@sol>

Le 03/01/2026 à 2:27 AM, Eric Biggers a écrit :
> On Fri, Jan 02, 2026 at 08:32:03AM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
>> On my development machine the generic, memcpy()-only implementation of
>> polyval_preparekey() is too fast for the IRQ workers to actually fire.
>> The test fails.
>>
>> Increase the iterations to make the test more robust.
>> The test will run for a maximum of one second in any case.
>>
>> Fixes: b3aed551b3fc ("lib/crypto: tests: Add KUnit tests for POLYVAL")
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> 
> Glad to see that people are running these tests!  I actually already
> applied
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20251219085259.1163048-1-davidgow@google.com/
> for this issue, which should be sufficient by itself.  Might be worth
> increasing the iteration count as well, but I'd like to check whether
> any other tests could use a similar change as well.
> 

The polyval one is the only one I got reliably, but I have just managed 
to reproduce this with crc.ctct10dif_test as well.

[19:47:29]     # crc_t10dif_test: EXPECTATION FAILED at 
include/kunit/run-in-irq-context.h:112
[19:47:29]     Expected state.hardirq_func_calls > 0, but
[19:47:29]         state.hardirq_func_calls == 0 (0x0)
[19:47:29]
[19:47:29] Timer function was not called
[19:47:29]     # crc_t10dif_test: EXPECTATION FAILED at 
include/kunit/run-in-irq-context.h:114
[19:47:29]     Expected state.softirq_func_calls > 0, but
[19:47:29]         state.softirq_func_calls == 0 (0x0)
[19:47:29]
[19:47:29] BH work function was not called
[19:47:29] [FAILED] crc_t10dif_test


It's only happening for me on aarch64, with hardware virtualisation (and 
it goes away if the crc test suite is the only one which gets run, 
interestingly).

And, of course, all of the issues go away with the patch applied / with 
-rc4.

Cheers,
-- David


      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-01-06 12:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-01-02  7:32 Thomas Weißschuh
2026-01-02 18:27 ` Eric Biggers
2026-01-05  8:21   ` Thomas Weißschuh
2026-01-07  4:06     ` Eric Biggers
2026-01-06 11:53   ` David Gow [this message]

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=3527d9cb-9982-4302-a9ca-d7ac2a10ccaf@davidgow.net \
    --to=david@davidgow.net \
    --cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®