The test_cases is not freed in kunit_free_suite_set().
And the copy pointer may be moved in kunit_filter_suites().
The filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases allocated in the last kunit_filter_attr_tests() in last inner for loop may be leaked if kunit_filter_suites() fails.
If kunit_filter_suites() succeeds, not only copy but also filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases should be freed.
Jinjie Ruan (4): kunit: Fix missed memory release in kunit_free_suite_set() kunit: Fix the wrong kfree of copy for kunit_filter_suites() kunit: Fix possible memory leak in kunit_filter_suites() kunit: test: Fix the possible memory leak in executor_test
lib/kunit/executor.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------ lib/kunit/executor_test.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
modprobe cpumask_kunit and rmmod cpumask_kunit, kmemleak detect a suspected memory leak as below.
If kunit_filter_suites() in kunit_module_init() succeeds, the suite_set.start will not be NULL and the kunit_free_suite_set() in kunit_module_exit() should free all the memory which has not been freed. However the test_cases in suites is left out.
unreferenced object 0xffff54ac47e83200 (size 512): comm "modprobe", pid 592, jiffies 4294913238 (age 1367.612s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 84 13 1a f0 d3 b6 ff ff 30 68 1a f0 d3 b6 ff ff ........0h...... 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ backtrace: [<000000008dec63a2>] slab_post_alloc_hook+0xb8/0x368 [<00000000ec280d8e>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x174/0x290 [<00000000896c7740>] __kmalloc+0x60/0x2c0 [<000000007a50fa06>] kunit_filter_suites+0x254/0x5b8 [<0000000078cc98e2>] kunit_module_notify+0xf4/0x240 [<0000000033cea952>] notifier_call_chain+0x98/0x17c [<00000000973d05cc>] notifier_call_chain_robust+0x4c/0xa4 [<000000005f95895f>] blocking_notifier_call_chain_robust+0x4c/0x74 [<0000000048e36fa7>] load_module+0x1a2c/0x1c40 [<0000000004eb8a91>] init_module_from_file+0x94/0xcc [<0000000037dbba28>] idempotent_init_module+0x184/0x278 [<00000000161b75cb>] __arm64_sys_finit_module+0x68/0xa8 [<000000006dc1669b>] invoke_syscall+0x44/0x100 [<00000000fa87e304>] el0_svc_common.constprop.1+0x68/0xe0 [<000000009d8ad866>] do_el0_svc+0x1c/0x28 [<000000005b83c607>] el0_svc+0x3c/0xc4
Fixes: e5857d396f35 ("kunit: flatten kunit_suite*** to kunit_suite** in .kunit_test_suites") Fixes: b67abaad4d25 ("kunit: Allow kunit test modules to use test filtering") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com --- lib/kunit/executor.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c index a6348489d45f..a037a46fae5e 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c @@ -137,8 +137,10 @@ void kunit_free_suite_set(struct kunit_suite_set suite_set) { struct kunit_suite * const *suites;
- for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++) + for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++) { + kfree((*suites)->test_cases); kfree(*suites); + } kfree(suite_set.start); }
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 7:47 AM 'Jinjie Ruan' via KUnit Development kunit-dev@googlegroups.com wrote:
modprobe cpumask_kunit and rmmod cpumask_kunit, kmemleak detect a suspected memory leak as below.
If kunit_filter_suites() in kunit_module_init() succeeds, the suite_set.start will not be NULL and the kunit_free_suite_set() in kunit_module_exit() should free all the memory which has not been freed. However the test_cases in suites is left out.
unreferenced object 0xffff54ac47e83200 (size 512): comm "modprobe", pid 592, jiffies 4294913238 (age 1367.612s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 84 13 1a f0 d3 b6 ff ff 30 68 1a f0 d3 b6 ff ff ........0h...... 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ backtrace: [<000000008dec63a2>] slab_post_alloc_hook+0xb8/0x368 [<00000000ec280d8e>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x174/0x290 [<00000000896c7740>] __kmalloc+0x60/0x2c0 [<000000007a50fa06>] kunit_filter_suites+0x254/0x5b8 [<0000000078cc98e2>] kunit_module_notify+0xf4/0x240 [<0000000033cea952>] notifier_call_chain+0x98/0x17c [<00000000973d05cc>] notifier_call_chain_robust+0x4c/0xa4 [<000000005f95895f>] blocking_notifier_call_chain_robust+0x4c/0x74 [<0000000048e36fa7>] load_module+0x1a2c/0x1c40 [<0000000004eb8a91>] init_module_from_file+0x94/0xcc [<0000000037dbba28>] idempotent_init_module+0x184/0x278 [<00000000161b75cb>] __arm64_sys_finit_module+0x68/0xa8 [<000000006dc1669b>] invoke_syscall+0x44/0x100 [<00000000fa87e304>] el0_svc_common.constprop.1+0x68/0xe0 [<000000009d8ad866>] do_el0_svc+0x1c/0x28 [<000000005b83c607>] el0_svc+0x3c/0xc4
Fixes: e5857d396f35 ("kunit: flatten kunit_suite*** to kunit_suite** in .kunit_test_suites") Fixes: b67abaad4d25 ("kunit: Allow kunit test modules to use test filtering") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com
Hello!
This looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Rae Moar rmoar@google.com
Thanks!
-Rae
lib/kunit/executor.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c index a6348489d45f..a037a46fae5e 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c @@ -137,8 +137,10 @@ void kunit_free_suite_set(struct kunit_suite_set suite_set) { struct kunit_suite * const *suites;
for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++)
for (suites = suite_set.start; suites < suite_set.end; suites++) {kfree((*suites)->test_cases); kfree(*suites);} kfree(suite_set.start);}
-- 2.34.1
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20230914114629.1517650-2-ruanjin....
If the outer layer for loop is iterated more than once and it fails not in the first iteration, the copy pointer has been moved. So it should free the original copy's backup copy_start.
Fixes: abbf73816b6f ("kunit: fix possible memory leak in kunit_filter_suites()") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com --- lib/kunit/executor.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c index a037a46fae5e..9358ed2df839 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c @@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set,
free_copy: if (*err) - kfree(copy); + kfree(copy_start);
return filtered; }
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 7:47 AM 'Jinjie Ruan' via KUnit Development kunit-dev@googlegroups.com wrote:
If the outer layer for loop is iterated more than once and it fails not in the first iteration, the copy pointer has been moved. So it should free the original copy's backup copy_start.
Fixes: abbf73816b6f ("kunit: fix possible memory leak in kunit_filter_suites()") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com
Hello!
This looks good to me as well.
Reviewed-by: Rae Moar rmoar@google.com
Thanks!
-Rae
lib/kunit/executor.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c index a037a46fae5e..9358ed2df839 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c @@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set,
free_copy: if (*err)
kfree(copy);
kfree(copy_start); return filtered;}
2.34.1
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20230914114629.1517650-3-ruanjin....
If the outer layer for loop is iterated more than once and it fails not in the first iteration, the filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases allocated in the last kunit_filter_attr_tests() in last inner for loop is leaked.
So add a new free_filtered_suite err label and free the filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases so far. And change kmalloc_array of copy to kcalloc to Clear the copy to make the kfree safe.
Fixes: 5d31f71efcb6 ("kunit: add kunit.filter_glob cmdline option to filter suites") Fixes: 529534e8cba3 ("kunit: Add ability to filter attributes") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com --- lib/kunit/executor.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c index 9358ed2df839..1236b3cd2fbb 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c @@ -157,10 +157,11 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, struct kunit_suite_set filtered = {NULL, NULL}; struct kunit_glob_filter parsed_glob; struct kunit_attr_filter *parsed_filters = NULL; + struct kunit_suite * const *suites;
const size_t max = suite_set->end - suite_set->start;
- copy = kmalloc_array(max, sizeof(*filtered.start), GFP_KERNEL); + copy = kcalloc(max, sizeof(*filtered.start), GFP_KERNEL); if (!copy) { /* won't be able to run anything, return an empty set */ return filtered; } @@ -195,7 +196,7 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, parsed_glob.test_glob); if (IS_ERR(filtered_suite)) { *err = PTR_ERR(filtered_suite); - goto free_parsed_filters; + goto free_filtered_suite; } } if (filter_count > 0 && parsed_filters != NULL) { @@ -212,11 +213,11 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, filtered_suite = new_filtered_suite;
if (*err) - goto free_parsed_filters; + goto free_filtered_suite;
if (IS_ERR(filtered_suite)) { *err = PTR_ERR(filtered_suite); - goto free_parsed_filters; + goto free_filtered_suite; } if (!filtered_suite) break; @@ -231,6 +232,14 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, filtered.start = copy_start; filtered.end = copy;
+free_filtered_suite: + if (*err) { + for (suites = copy_start; suites < copy; suites++) { + kfree((*suites)->test_cases); + kfree(*suites); + } + } + free_parsed_filters: if (filter_count) kfree(parsed_filters);
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 7:47 AM 'Jinjie Ruan' via KUnit Development kunit-dev@googlegroups.com wrote:
If the outer layer for loop is iterated more than once and it fails not in the first iteration, the filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases allocated in the last kunit_filter_attr_tests() in last inner for loop is leaked.
So add a new free_filtered_suite err label and free the filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases so far. And change kmalloc_array of copy to kcalloc to Clear the copy to make the kfree safe.
Fixes: 5d31f71efcb6 ("kunit: add kunit.filter_glob cmdline option to filter suites") Fixes: 529534e8cba3 ("kunit: Add ability to filter attributes") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com
Hello!
This looks good to me. I just have one comment below.
Reviewed-by: Rae Moar rmoar@google.com
Thanks! -Rae
lib/kunit/executor.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c index 9358ed2df839..1236b3cd2fbb 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c @@ -157,10 +157,11 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, struct kunit_suite_set filtered = {NULL, NULL}; struct kunit_glob_filter parsed_glob; struct kunit_attr_filter *parsed_filters = NULL;
struct kunit_suite * const *suites; const size_t max = suite_set->end - suite_set->start;
copy = kmalloc_array(max, sizeof(*filtered.start), GFP_KERNEL);
copy = kcalloc(max, sizeof(*filtered.start), GFP_KERNEL); if (!copy) { /* won't be able to run anything, return an empty set */ return filtered; }@@ -195,7 +196,7 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, parsed_glob.test_glob); if (IS_ERR(filtered_suite)) { *err = PTR_ERR(filtered_suite);
goto free_parsed_filters;
goto free_filtered_suite; } } if (filter_count > 0 && parsed_filters != NULL) {@@ -212,11 +213,11 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, filtered_suite = new_filtered_suite;
if (*err)
goto free_parsed_filters;
goto free_filtered_suite; if (IS_ERR(filtered_suite)) { *err = PTR_ERR(filtered_suite);
goto free_parsed_filters;
goto free_filtered_suite; } if (!filtered_suite) break;@@ -231,6 +232,14 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, filtered.start = copy_start; filtered.end = copy;
+free_filtered_suite:
if (*err) {for (suites = copy_start; suites < copy; suites++) {kfree((*suites)->test_cases);kfree(*suites);}}
As this is pretty similar code to kunit_free_suite_set, I wish you could use that method instead but I'm not actually sure it would be cleaner.
free_parsed_filters: if (filter_count) kfree(parsed_filters); -- 2.34.1
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20230914114629.1517650-4-ruanjin....
On 2023/9/20 5:18, Rae Moar wrote:
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 7:47 AM 'Jinjie Ruan' via KUnit Development kunit-dev@googlegroups.com wrote:
If the outer layer for loop is iterated more than once and it fails not in the first iteration, the filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases allocated in the last kunit_filter_attr_tests() in last inner for loop is leaked.
So add a new free_filtered_suite err label and free the filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases so far. And change kmalloc_array of copy to kcalloc to Clear the copy to make the kfree safe.
Fixes: 5d31f71efcb6 ("kunit: add kunit.filter_glob cmdline option to filter suites") Fixes: 529534e8cba3 ("kunit: Add ability to filter attributes") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com
Hello!
This looks good to me. I just have one comment below.
Reviewed-by: Rae Moar rmoar@google.com
Thanks! -Rae
lib/kunit/executor.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c index 9358ed2df839..1236b3cd2fbb 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c @@ -157,10 +157,11 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, struct kunit_suite_set filtered = {NULL, NULL}; struct kunit_glob_filter parsed_glob; struct kunit_attr_filter *parsed_filters = NULL;
struct kunit_suite * const *suites; const size_t max = suite_set->end - suite_set->start;
copy = kmalloc_array(max, sizeof(*filtered.start), GFP_KERNEL);
copy = kcalloc(max, sizeof(*filtered.start), GFP_KERNEL); if (!copy) { /* won't be able to run anything, return an empty set */ return filtered; }@@ -195,7 +196,7 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, parsed_glob.test_glob); if (IS_ERR(filtered_suite)) { *err = PTR_ERR(filtered_suite);
goto free_parsed_filters;
goto free_filtered_suite; } } if (filter_count > 0 && parsed_filters != NULL) {@@ -212,11 +213,11 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, filtered_suite = new_filtered_suite;
if (*err)
goto free_parsed_filters;
goto free_filtered_suite; if (IS_ERR(filtered_suite)) { *err = PTR_ERR(filtered_suite);
goto free_parsed_filters;
goto free_filtered_suite; } if (!filtered_suite) break;@@ -231,6 +232,14 @@ kunit_filter_suites(const struct kunit_suite_set *suite_set, filtered.start = copy_start; filtered.end = copy;
+free_filtered_suite:
if (*err) {for (suites = copy_start; suites < copy; suites++) {kfree((*suites)->test_cases);kfree(*suites);}}As this is pretty similar code to kunit_free_suite_set, I wish you could use that method instead but I'm not actually sure it would be cleaner.
There is a slight difference between here and kunit_free_suite_set(), it do not kfree(suite_set.start) which is kfree(copy_start) here as it is the first kcalloc.
free_parsed_filters: if (filter_count) kfree(parsed_filters); -- 2.34.1
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20230914114629.1517650-4-ruanjin....
If kunit_filter_suites() succeeds, not only copy but also filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases should be freed.
So use kunit_free_suite_set() to free the filtered_suite, filtered_suite->test_cases and copy as kunit_module_exit() and kunit_run_all_tests() do it.
Fixes: e5857d396f35 ("kunit: flatten kunit_suite*** to kunit_suite** in .kunit_test_suites") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com --- lib/kunit/executor_test.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor_test.c b/lib/kunit/executor_test.c index b4f6f96b2844..987b81dce01e 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor_test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor_test.c @@ -56,7 +56,6 @@ static void filter_suites_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "suite2", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0); - kfree_at_end(test, got.start);
/* Validate we just have suite2 */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]); @@ -64,6 +63,9 @@ static void filter_suites_test(struct kunit *test)
/* Contains one element (end is 1 past end) */ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, got.end - got.start, 1); + + if (!err) + kunit_free_suite_set(got); }
static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -82,7 +84,6 @@ static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "suite2.test2", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0); - kfree_at_end(test, got.start);
/* Validate we just have suite2 */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]); @@ -93,6 +94,9 @@ static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases); KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, (const char *)got.start[0]->test_cases[0].name, "test2"); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].name); + + if (!err) + kunit_free_suite_set(got); }
static void filter_suites_to_empty_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -109,10 +113,12 @@ static void filter_suites_to_empty_test(struct kunit *test)
got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "not_found", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0); - kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* just in case */
KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, got.start, got.end, "should be empty to indicate no match"); + + if (!err) + kunit_free_suite_set(got); }
static void parse_filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -172,7 +178,6 @@ static void filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0); - kfree_at_end(test, got.start);
/* Validate we just have normal_suite */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]); @@ -183,6 +188,9 @@ static void filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases); KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[0].name, "normal"); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].name); + + if (!err) + kunit_free_suite_set(got); }
static void filter_attr_empty_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -200,10 +208,12 @@ static void filter_attr_empty_test(struct kunit *test)
got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0); - kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* just in case */
KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, got.start, got.end, "should be empty to indicate no match"); + + if (!err) + kunit_free_suite_set(got); }
static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -222,7 +232,6 @@ static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, "skip", &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0); - kfree_at_end(test, got.start);
/* Validate we have both the slow and normal test */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases); @@ -233,6 +242,9 @@ static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) /* Now ensure slow is skipped and normal is not */ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[0].status, KUNIT_SKIPPED); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].status); + + if (!err) + kunit_free_suite_set(got); }
static struct kunit_case executor_test_cases[] = {
Hi Jinjie,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on linus/master] [also build test WARNING on next-20230914] [cannot apply to v6.6-rc1] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Jinjie-Ruan/kunit-Fix-missed-... base: linus/master patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230914114629.1517650-5-ruanjinjie%40huawei.com patch subject: [PATCH 4/4] kunit: test: Fix the possible memory leak in executor_test config: m68k-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230914/202309142251.uJ8saAZv-lkp@i...) compiler: m68k-linux-gcc (GCC) 13.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230914/202309142251.uJ8saAZv-lkp@i...)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot lkp@intel.com | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202309142251.uJ8saAZv-lkp@intel.com/
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
In file included from lib/kunit/executor.c:353:
lib/kunit/executor_test.c:274:13: warning: 'kfree_at_end' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
274 | static void kfree_at_end(struct kunit *test, const void *to_free) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~
vim +/kfree_at_end +274 lib/kunit/executor_test.c
1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 270 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 271 /* Use the resource API to register a call to kfree(to_free). 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 272 * Since we never actually use the resource, it's safe to use on const data. 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 273 */ 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 @274 static void kfree_at_end(struct kunit *test, const void *to_free) 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 275 { 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 276 /* kfree() handles NULL already, but avoid allocating a no-op cleanup. */ 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 277 if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(to_free)) 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 278 return; 00e63f8afcfc6b David Gow 2023-05-25 279 00e63f8afcfc6b David Gow 2023-05-25 280 kunit_add_action(test, 00e63f8afcfc6b David Gow 2023-05-25 281 (kunit_action_t *)kfree, 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 282 (void *)to_free); 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 283 } 1d71307a6f94df Daniel Latypov 2021-04-20 284
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 7:47 AM 'Jinjie Ruan' via KUnit Development kunit-dev@googlegroups.com wrote:
If kunit_filter_suites() succeeds, not only copy but also filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases should be freed.
So use kunit_free_suite_set() to free the filtered_suite, filtered_suite->test_cases and copy as kunit_module_exit() and kunit_run_all_tests() do it.
Fixes: e5857d396f35 ("kunit: flatten kunit_suite*** to kunit_suite** in .kunit_test_suites") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com
Hello!
This looks mostly good to me. But I have one notable comment. See below.
Thanks! -Rae
lib/kunit/executor_test.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor_test.c b/lib/kunit/executor_test.c index b4f6f96b2844..987b81dce01e 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor_test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor_test.c @@ -56,7 +56,6 @@ static void filter_suites_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "suite2", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we just have suite2 */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]);@@ -64,6 +63,9 @@ static void filter_suites_test(struct kunit *test)
/* Contains one element (end is 1 past end) */ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, got.end - got.start, 1);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);
I definitely appreciate the change to free all of "got" rather than just "got.start".
However, kfree_at_end used deferred actions to ensure the kfree would occur at the end of the test. With this change, if the test fails the suite set could not be freed.
Intead, is there any way to alter the function kfree_at_end (could be renamed) to take in "got" and then use deferred actions to ensure kunit_free_suite_set is called at the end of the test?
Let me know what you think about this.
}
static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -82,7 +84,6 @@ static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "suite2.test2", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we just have suite2 */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]);@@ -93,6 +94,9 @@ static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases); KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, (const char *)got.start[0]->test_cases[0].name, "test2"); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].name);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void filter_suites_to_empty_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -109,10 +113,12 @@ static void filter_suites_to_empty_test(struct kunit *test)
got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "not_found", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* just in case */ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, got.start, got.end, "should be empty to indicate no match");
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void parse_filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -172,7 +178,6 @@ static void filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we just have normal_suite */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]);@@ -183,6 +188,9 @@ static void filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases); KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[0].name, "normal"); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].name);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void filter_attr_empty_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -200,10 +208,12 @@ static void filter_attr_empty_test(struct kunit *test)
got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* just in case */ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, got.start, got.end, "should be empty to indicate no match");
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -222,7 +232,6 @@ static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, "skip", &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we have both the slow and normal test */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases);@@ -233,6 +242,9 @@ static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) /* Now ensure slow is skipped and normal is not */ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[0].status, KUNIT_SKIPPED); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].status);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static struct kunit_case executor_test_cases[] = {
2.34.1
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20230914114629.1517650-5-ruanjin....
On 2023/9/20 5:19, Rae Moar wrote:
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 7:47 AM 'Jinjie Ruan' via KUnit Development kunit-dev@googlegroups.com wrote:
If kunit_filter_suites() succeeds, not only copy but also filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases should be freed.
So use kunit_free_suite_set() to free the filtered_suite, filtered_suite->test_cases and copy as kunit_module_exit() and kunit_run_all_tests() do it.
Fixes: e5857d396f35 ("kunit: flatten kunit_suite*** to kunit_suite** in .kunit_test_suites") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com
Hello!
This looks mostly good to me. But I have one notable comment. See below.
Thanks! -Rae
lib/kunit/executor_test.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor_test.c b/lib/kunit/executor_test.c index b4f6f96b2844..987b81dce01e 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor_test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor_test.c @@ -56,7 +56,6 @@ static void filter_suites_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "suite2", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we just have suite2 */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]);@@ -64,6 +63,9 @@ static void filter_suites_test(struct kunit *test)
/* Contains one element (end is 1 past end) */ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, got.end - got.start, 1);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);I definitely appreciate the change to free all of "got" rather than just "got.start".
However, kfree_at_end used deferred actions to ensure the kfree would occur at the end of the test. With this change, if the test fails the suite set could not be freed.
Only when suite_set.start != NULL which is equivalent to err == 0 the suite set will be freed in kunit_module_exit(), and kunit_free_suite_set() will be called only when kunit_filter_suites() succeeds with err == 0. So judging from the use of kunit_filter_suites() in kunit_module_exit() and kunit_run_all_tests(), it only wants to free the suite set when kunit_filter_suites() succeeds with err == 0. So in kunit_filter_suites() , we free copy, filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases if (*err) is true.
So if the test fails the suite set will be freed also. And there's a double free problem in kfree_at_end(test, got.start) if the test fails. So only free the suite set when err == 0.
737 static void kunit_module_init(struct module *mod) 738 { 739 struct kunit_suite_set suite_set = { 740 mod->kunit_suites, mod->kunit_suites + mod->num_kunit_suites, 741 }; 742 const char *action = kunit_action(); 743 int err = 0; 744 745 suite_set = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, 746 kunit_filter_glob() ?: "*.*", 747 kunit_filter(), kunit_filter_action(), 748 &err);
765 static void kunit_module_exit(struct module *mod) 766 { 767 struct kunit_suite_set suite_set = { 768 mod->kunit_suites, mod->kunit_suites + mod->num_kunit_suites, 769 }; 770 const char *action = kunit_action(); 771 772 if (!action) 773 __kunit_test_suites_exit(mod->kunit_suites, 774 mod->num_kunit_suites); 775 776 if (suite_set.start) 777 kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); 778 }
314 int kunit_run_all_tests(void) 315 { ...... 325 if (filter_glob_param || filter_param) { 326 suite_set = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, filter_glob_param, 327 filter_param, filter_action_param, &err); 328 if (err) { 329 pr_err("kunit executor: error filtering suites: %d\n", err); 330 goto out; 331 } 332 } ...... 342 343 if (filter_glob_param || filter_param) { /* a copy was made of each suite */ 344 kunit_free_suite_set(suite_set); 345 } 346 347 out: 348 kunit_handle_shutdown(); 349 return err; 350 }
Intead, is there any way to alter the function kfree_at_end (could be renamed) to take in "got" and then use deferred actions to ensure kunit_free_suite_set is called at the end of the test?
It is good iead. And it may be fine to call kfree_at_end(test, got) if err == 0 to avoid double free issue.
Let me know what you think about this.
}
static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -82,7 +84,6 @@ static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "suite2.test2", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we just have suite2 */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]);@@ -93,6 +94,9 @@ static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases); KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, (const char *)got.start[0]->test_cases[0].name, "test2"); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].name);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void filter_suites_to_empty_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -109,10 +113,12 @@ static void filter_suites_to_empty_test(struct kunit *test)
got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "not_found", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* just in case */ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, got.start, got.end, "should be empty to indicate no match");
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void parse_filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -172,7 +178,6 @@ static void filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we just have normal_suite */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]);@@ -183,6 +188,9 @@ static void filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases); KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[0].name, "normal"); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].name);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void filter_attr_empty_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -200,10 +208,12 @@ static void filter_attr_empty_test(struct kunit *test)
got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* just in case */ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, got.start, got.end, "should be empty to indicate no match");
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -222,7 +232,6 @@ static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, "skip", &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we have both the slow and normal test */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases);@@ -233,6 +242,9 @@ static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) /* Now ensure slow is skipped and normal is not */ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[0].status, KUNIT_SKIPPED); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].status);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static struct kunit_case executor_test_cases[] = {
2.34.1
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20230914114629.1517650-5-ruanjin....
On 2023/9/20 5:19, Rae Moar wrote:
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 7:47 AM 'Jinjie Ruan' via KUnit Development kunit-dev@googlegroups.com wrote:
If kunit_filter_suites() succeeds, not only copy but also filtered_suite and filtered_suite->test_cases should be freed.
So use kunit_free_suite_set() to free the filtered_suite, filtered_suite->test_cases and copy as kunit_module_exit() and kunit_run_all_tests() do it.
Fixes: e5857d396f35 ("kunit: flatten kunit_suite*** to kunit_suite** in .kunit_test_suites") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan ruanjinjie@huawei.com
Hello!
This looks mostly good to me. But I have one notable comment. See below.
Thanks! -Rae
lib/kunit/executor_test.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor_test.c b/lib/kunit/executor_test.c index b4f6f96b2844..987b81dce01e 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor_test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor_test.c @@ -56,7 +56,6 @@ static void filter_suites_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "suite2", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we just have suite2 */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]);@@ -64,6 +63,9 @@ static void filter_suites_test(struct kunit *test)
/* Contains one element (end is 1 past end) */ KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, got.end - got.start, 1);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);I definitely appreciate the change to free all of "got" rather than just "got.start".
However, kfree_at_end used deferred actions to ensure the kfree would occur at the end of the test. With this change, if the test fails the suite set could not be freed.
Intead, is there any way to alter the function kfree_at_end (could be renamed) to take in "got" and then use deferred actions to ensure kunit_free_suite_set is called at the end of the test?
I try it and it seems unfeasible because the got is a local struct kunit_suite_set and kunit_free_suite_set use it in another func will cause wild-memory-access as the struct kunit_suite_set has been freed already.
[ 49.490158] general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xe006fbfff71d514d: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN [ 49.493858] KASAN: maybe wild-memory-access in range [0x0037ffffb8ea8a68-0x0037ffffb8ea8a6f] [ 49.495391] CPU: 2 PID: 1439 Comm: kunit_try_catch Tainted: G B N 6.6.0-rc2+ #29 [ 49.496578] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014 [ 49.497715] RIP: 0010:kunit_free_suite_set+0x8e/0x150 [ 49.498419] Code: 4d 89 fe 49 c1 ee 03 49 01 de 48 89 e8 48 c1 e8 03 80 3c 18 00 75 7d 4c 8b 65 00 49 8d bc 24 20 01 00 00 48 89 f8 48 c1 e8 03 <80> 3c 18 00 0f 85 81 00 00 00 49 8b bc 24 20 01 00 00 e8 2b 90 e0 [ 49.500918] RSP: 0000:ffff8881047f7e18 EFLAGS: 00010207 [ 49.501627] RAX: 0006fffff71d514d RBX: dffffc0000000000 RCX: 1ffff11020814d9e [ 49.502597] RDX: 1ffff110214f6fbc RSI: 0000000000000004 RDI: 0037ffffb8ea8a6c [ 49.503553] RBP: ffffffff811d098f R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1020814d99 [ 49.504526] R10: ffff8881040a6ccb R11: 0000000000000400 R12: 0037ffffb8ea894c [ 49.505489] R13: ffff88810a7b7dd8 R14: ffffed10214f6fbc R15: ffff88810a7b7de0 [ 49.506470] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff888119d00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 49.507497] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 49.508200] CR2: ffff88811948dfff CR3: 0000000005286001 CR4: 0000000000770ee0 [ 49.509078] DR0: ffffffff8fdd6ce8 DR1: ffffffff8fdd6ce9 DR2: ffffffff8fdd6cea [ 49.509909] DR3: ffffffff8fdd6ceb DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000600 [ 49.510790] PKRU: 55555554 [ 49.511127] Call Trace: [ 49.511448] <TASK> [ 49.511715] ? die_addr+0x3d/0xa0 [ 49.512133] ? exc_general_protection+0x144/0x220 [ 49.512725] ? asm_exc_general_protection+0x22/0x30 [ 49.513323] ? do_exit+0x125f/0x2240 [ 49.513785] ? kunit_free_suite_set+0x8e/0x150 [ 49.514330] ? _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x8d/0xe0 [ 49.514901] kunit_remove_resource+0x191/0x2a0 [ 49.515464] ? __sched_text_end+0xa/0xa [ 49.515949] ? __sched_text_end+0xa/0xa [ 49.516432] kunit_cleanup+0x6f/0x110 [ 49.516885] ? kunit_cleanup+0x110/0x110 [ 49.517374] kunit_generic_run_threadfn_adapter+0x4a/0x90 [ 49.518045] ? kunit_try_catch_throw+0x80/0x80 [ 49.518623] kthread+0x2b5/0x380 [ 49.519032] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20 [ 49.519626] ret_from_fork+0x2d/0x70 [ 49.520078] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20 [ 49.520679] ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20 [ 49.521179] </TASK> [ 49.521459] Modules linked in: [ 49.521849] Dumping ftrace buffer: [ 49.522273] (ftrace buffer empty) [ 49.522764] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- [ 49.523416] RIP: 0010:kunit_free_suite_set+0x8e/0x150 [ 49.524049] Code: 4d 89 fe 49 c1 ee 03 49 01 de 48 89 e8 48 c1 e8 03 80 3c 18 00 75 7d 4c 8b 65 00 49 8d bc 24 20 01 00 00 48 89 f8 48 c1 e8 03 <80> 3c 18 00 0f 85 81 00 00 00 49 8b bc 24 20 01 00 00 e8 2b 90 e0 [ 49.526357] RSP: 0000:ffff8881047f7e18 EFLAGS: 00010207 [ 49.527026] RAX: 0006fffff71d514d RBX: dffffc0000000000 RCX: 1ffff11020814d9e [ 49.527898] RDX: 1ffff110214f6fbc RSI: 0000000000000004 RDI: 0037ffffb8ea8a6c [ 49.528765] RBP: ffffffff811d098f R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1020814d99 [ 49.529633] R10: ffff8881040a6ccb R11: 0000000000000400 R12: 0037ffffb8ea894c [ 49.530524] R13: ffff88810a7b7dd8 R14: ffffed10214f6fbc R15: ffff88810a7b7de0 [ 49.531405] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff888119d00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 49.532386] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 49.533094] CR2: ffff88811948dfff CR3: 0000000005286001 CR4: 0000000000770ee0 [ 49.533971] DR0: ffffffff8fdd6ce8 DR1: ffffffff8fdd6ce9 DR2: ffffffff8fdd6cea [ 49.534879] DR3: ffffffff8fdd6ceb DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000600 [ 49.535774] PKRU: 55555554 [ 49.536108] Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception [ 49.537673] Dumping ftrace buffer: [ 49.538076] (ftrace buffer empty) [ 49.538531] Kernel Offset: disabled [ 49.538963] Rebooting in 1 seconds..
Let me know what you think about this.
}
static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -82,7 +84,6 @@ static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "suite2.test2", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we just have suite2 */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]);@@ -93,6 +94,9 @@ static void filter_suites_test_glob_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases); KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, (const char *)got.start[0]->test_cases[0].name, "test2"); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].name);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void filter_suites_to_empty_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -109,10 +113,12 @@ static void filter_suites_to_empty_test(struct kunit *test)
got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, "not_found", NULL, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* just in case */ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, got.start, got.end, "should be empty to indicate no match");
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void parse_filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -172,7 +178,6 @@ static void filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we just have normal_suite */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]);@@ -183,6 +188,9 @@ static void filter_attr_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases); KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[0].name, "normal"); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].name);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void filter_attr_empty_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -200,10 +208,12 @@ static void filter_attr_empty_test(struct kunit *test)
got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, NULL, &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* just in case */ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ_MSG(test, got.start, got.end, "should be empty to indicate no match");
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) @@ -222,7 +232,6 @@ static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) got = kunit_filter_suites(&suite_set, NULL, filter, "skip", &err); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start); KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, err, 0);
kfree_at_end(test, got.start); /* Validate we have both the slow and normal test */ KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, got.start[0]->test_cases);@@ -233,6 +242,9 @@ static void filter_attr_skip_test(struct kunit *test) /* Now ensure slow is skipped and normal is not */ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[0].status, KUNIT_SKIPPED); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, got.start[0]->test_cases[1].status);
if (!err)kunit_free_suite_set(got);}
static struct kunit_case executor_test_cases[] = {
2.34.1
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20230914114629.1517650-5-ruanjin....
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Jinjie Ruan -
kernel test robot -
Rae Moar -
Ruan Jinjie