From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B441EEB64DD for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 12:14:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231309AbjHIMOQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2023 08:14:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46490 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229699AbjHIMOO (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2023 08:14:14 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001ae601.pphosted.com (mx0b-001ae601.pphosted.com [67.231.152.168]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D15D5DF; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 05:14:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0077474.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001ae601.pphosted.com (8.17.1.22/8.17.1.22) with ESMTP id 379C6Gsi028071; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 07:14:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cirrus.com; h= message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references:from :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= PODMain02222019; bh=jxgoDtPydQdeKTqTUZWZb2yVcNVPJMlyxEig8pM1wyM=; b= em47igD8t8ayu6iwXNhpHXD9qArfnpwHWcKKKkeS2c+O53yxyfmZOH6YekcXUwOP tuHZAjFMIuVlTOUGNp9rOLIzyMRTTmkWUpCLhjArpNT++byd1ZPif4Nu0omAGl2t YuWFekDKgQ0suLWI7fvbAmsdD6wYX1PA79o/CqEoud7BEWwe37k0MqIip4j3GIrS zPiW19HeDd7BfvJsqndJNXFqWVuKO3b8Q0n/ebKYH6a/9lIBLnz0Zi160y7WP2gc OPu2IXc0isxX7H+XYd+9tp5PeRVWH+fC+JG9/jILL8EwRE2N7DKoTO2tE9OaJeRQ EdMFbTzxJuNEQa8I1K+GRg== Received: from ediex01.ad.cirrus.com ([84.19.233.68]) by mx0b-001ae601.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3s9juhumy2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 09 Aug 2023 07:14:09 -0500 (CDT) Received: from ediex01.ad.cirrus.com (198.61.84.80) by ediex01.ad.cirrus.com (198.61.84.80) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1118.30; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 13:14:07 +0100 Received: from ediswmail.ad.cirrus.com (198.61.86.93) by ediex01.ad.cirrus.com (198.61.84.80) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.2.1118.30 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 13:14:07 +0100 Received: from [198.61.64.220] (EDIN4L06LR3.ad.cirrus.com [198.61.64.220]) by ediswmail.ad.cirrus.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23F7E45D; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 12:14:07 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2023 13:14:06 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.14.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] kunit: kunit-test: Add test cases for extending log buffer Content-Language: en-US To: David Gow CC: Rae Moar , , , , , References: <20230808123529.4725-1-rf@opensource.cirrus.com> <20230808123529.4725-3-rf@opensource.cirrus.com> <371a6ba0-c076-8e44-ae2f-32429de507da@opensource.cirrus.com> From: Richard Fitzgerald In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-GUID: LuLLiIjAJqdo6KCB7YV5XU7Ol47FGpuf X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: LuLLiIjAJqdo6KCB7YV5XU7Ol47FGpuf X-Proofpoint-Spam-Reason: safe Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 9/8/23 13:11, David Gow wrote: > On Wed, 9 Aug 2023 at 17:39, Richard Fitzgerald > wrote: >> >> On 8/8/23 22:16, Rae Moar wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 8:35 AM Richard Fitzgerald >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Add test cases for the dynamically-extending log buffer. >>>> >>>> kunit_log_extend_test_1() logs a series of numbered lines then tests >>>> that the resulting log contains all the lines. >>>> >>>> kunit_log_extend_test_2() logs a large number of lines of varying length >>>> to create many fragments, then tests that all lines are present. >>>> >>>> kunit_log_frag_sized_line_test() logs a line that exactly fills a >>>> fragment. This should not cause an extension of the log or truncation >>>> of the line. >>>> >>>> kunit_log_newline_test() has a new test to append a line that is exactly >>>> the length of the available space in the current fragment and check that >>>> the resulting log has a trailing '\n'. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Fitzgerald >>> >>> Hello! >>> >>> I am happy to see so many tests in this patch series. I've been >>> working with these patches and the debugfs logs seem to be working >>> well. >>> >>> However, when I ran the new kunit-log-test tests three of the tests >>> failed: kunit_log_extend_test_1(), kunit_log_extend_test_2(), and >>> kunit_log_newline_test(). >>> >>> The diagnostic info for kunit_log_extend_test_1() reports: >>> >>> [20:55:27] # kunit_log_extend_test_1: EXPECTATION FAILED at >>> lib/kunit/kunit-test.c:705 >>> [20:55:27] Expected p == line, but >>> [20:55:27] p == "xxxxxx…xxxx12345678" >>> [20:55:27] line == "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy penguin 0" >>> … >>> [20:55:27] # kunit_log_extend_test_1: EXPECTATION FAILED at >>> lib/kunit/kunit-test.c:705 >>> [20:55:27] Expected p == line, but >>> [20:55:27] p == "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy penguin 1" >>> [20:55:27] line == "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy penguin 4" >>> [20:55:27] # kunit_log_extend_test_1: EXPECTATION FAILED at >>> lib/kunit/kunit-test.c:705 >>> [20:55:27] Expected p == line, but >>> [20:55:27] p == "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy penguin 2" >>> [20:55:27] line == "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy penguin 5" >>> … >>> [20:55:27] # kunit_log_extend_test_1: EXPECTATION FAILED at >>> lib/kunit/kunit-test.c:709 >>> [20:55:27] Expected i == num_lines, but >>> [20:55:27] i == 64 (0x40) >>> [20:55:27] num_lines == 141 (0x8d) >>> >>> So it looks like the log contains a different number of lines than >>> expected which is causing the difference of 3 between expected and >>> what was obtained. Potentially the log is not getting cleared/freed >>> properly in between test cases? >>> >>> The diagnostic info for kunit_log_extend_test_2() reports: >>> >>> [20:55:27] # kunit_log_extend_test_2: EXPECTATION FAILED at >>> lib/kunit/kunit-test.c:776 >>> [20:55:27] Expected p == &line[i], but >>> [20:55:27] p == >>> "xxxxx...xxxxx123456780123456789abcdef101112131415161718191a1b1c1d1e1f202122232425262728292a2b2c2d2e2f30313233343536373839" >>> [20:55:27] &line[i] == >>> "0123456789abcdef101112131415161718191a1b1c1d1e1f202122232425262728292a2b2c2d2e2f30313233343536373839" >>> [20:55:27] # kunit_log_extend_test_2: EXPECTATION FAILED at >>> lib/kunit/kunit-test.c:781 >>> [20:55:27] Expected n == num_lines, but >>> [20:55:27] n == 147 (0x93) >>> [20:55:27] num_lines == 155 (0x9b) >>> [20:55:27] Not enough lines. >>> >>> Similar difference in the number of lines here. >>> >>> The diagnostic info for kunit_log_newline_test() reports that the test >>> fails on this line: >>> >>> KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, p[strlen(p) - 1], '\n'); >>> >>> Let me know if you are seeing similar errors. I can post the full log >>> if that would be helpful. >>> >>> -Rae >>> >> >> Ah, I see a bug in get_concatenated_log(). >> Does this change fix it for you? >> >> len++; /* for terminating '\0' */ >> - p = kunit_kmalloc(test, len, GFP_KERNEL); >> + p = kunit_kzalloc(test, len, GFP_KERNEL); > > This fixes what seems to be the same issue for me, under x86_64/qemu. > > Thanks, > -- David Good. It seems that the various memory security options have the side-effect of covering up this bug. I don't know which one exactly (I've just turned them all off). I had been testing with them on. I'll send a V3.