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 kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A143CF9C7E for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 12:54:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3F2436B0095; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 08:54:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 3A1896B0096; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 08:54:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 1F4546B0098; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 08:54:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F413A6B0095 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 08:54:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin22.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0FC812171D for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 12:54:42 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82606883604.22.5A46CB1 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.223.131]) by imf24.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39E10180020 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 12:54:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf24.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b="P/gG0Shz"; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=9vUikMBQ; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b="P/gG0Shz"; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=9vUikMBQ; dmarc=none; spf=pass (imf24.hostedemail.com: domain of vbabka@suse.cz designates 195.135.223.131 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=vbabka@suse.cz ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1727355145; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=bMhp2djDzbzLsssLY1csuVYy8r55JqJ66r6qRBhdYpc=; b=mygekB7D7PuFEOD2tOS7pcPjAgukR40SI7QVYqP0ao1jhTaU7lD2hQ2/aP7UtjMJDmPpar HwdSxcOD9sXQktepRJGl0u3d+yPrchTMiuj6JAkdT+OpiaQomLTn4DQdVysI9z7M16a7bl q/mzHWIbNMN92dvzHutSv6qn3DsT/ts= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1727355145; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Cym36GgSFRiLgQiRzdt+LBcfdBOYOb+ZZYNitCKTJD576CsqtFmOpqZXQrF8qHv2l1gBvZ 4dKOacdP8FVO2c5ft50CqCHQIH8eD8TqjVRGSPwsSwAz9r1ZM4qynwKbCXWbAMXeKmnjuv huZEfGZfiCEeIYN1lBcAYeAdSXCImFg= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf24.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b="P/gG0Shz"; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=9vUikMBQ; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b="P/gG0Shz"; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=9vUikMBQ; dmarc=none; spf=pass (imf24.hostedemail.com: domain of vbabka@suse.cz designates 195.135.223.131 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=vbabka@suse.cz Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22F3C1F897; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 12:54:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1727355277; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=bMhp2djDzbzLsssLY1csuVYy8r55JqJ66r6qRBhdYpc=; b=P/gG0ShzNezQw8yP6z+C8/8OzkAcsdI5b4dT4rwzJEyVCTiNxoZR3xEULNj0q8PhzyFAsJ axrOJESFoD3jakJTH/s2zkkZ2cEMsSVC1p49trqNmSXmceJW1425GSQlGnkM5ld7QcOt3a VOMF9vp8kzQ41lRiRRvvKjYdM4NcUsw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1727355277; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=bMhp2djDzbzLsssLY1csuVYy8r55JqJ66r6qRBhdYpc=; b=9vUikMBQcwXZjRD3MryPkxWeXnDQFgStKOxK1opqkecjif4tQkfbbOPuPYINd2BNwpTvzD XY7YcMewrE58naDg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1727355277; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=bMhp2djDzbzLsssLY1csuVYy8r55JqJ66r6qRBhdYpc=; b=P/gG0ShzNezQw8yP6z+C8/8OzkAcsdI5b4dT4rwzJEyVCTiNxoZR3xEULNj0q8PhzyFAsJ axrOJESFoD3jakJTH/s2zkkZ2cEMsSVC1p49trqNmSXmceJW1425GSQlGnkM5ld7QcOt3a VOMF9vp8kzQ41lRiRRvvKjYdM4NcUsw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1727355277; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=bMhp2djDzbzLsssLY1csuVYy8r55JqJ66r6qRBhdYpc=; b=9vUikMBQcwXZjRD3MryPkxWeXnDQFgStKOxK1opqkecjif4tQkfbbOPuPYINd2BNwpTvzD XY7YcMewrE58naDg== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6B6A13318; Thu, 26 Sep 2024 12:54:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id jg+rM4xZ9WbtWgAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Thu, 26 Sep 2024 12:54:36 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 14:54:36 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] kunit, slub: add test_kfree_rcu() and test_leak_destroy() Content-Language: en-US To: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>, Guenter Roeck Cc: KUnit Development , Brendan Higgins , David Gow , "Paul E. McKenney" , Joel Fernandes , Josh Triplett , Boqun Feng , Christoph Lameter , David Rientjes , Steven Rostedt , Mathieu Desnoyers , Lai Jiangshan , Zqiang , Julia Lawall , Jakub Kicinski , "Jason A. Donenfeld" , "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" , Andrew Morton , Roman Gushchin , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Potapenko , Marco Elver , Dmitry Vyukov , kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, Jann Horn , Mateusz Guzik References: <20240807-b4-slab-kfree_rcu-destroy-v2-0-ea79102f428c@suse.cz> <20240807-b4-slab-kfree_rcu-destroy-v2-7-ea79102f428c@suse.cz> <6fcb1252-7990-4f0d-8027-5e83f0fb9409@roeck-us.net> <07d5a214-a6c2-4444-8122-0a7b1cdd711f@suse.cz> <73f9e6d7-f5c0-4cdc-a9c4-dde3e2fb057c@roeck-us.net> <474b0519-b354-4370-84ac-411fd3d6d14b@suse.cz> From: Vlastimil Babka Autocrypt: addr=vbabka@suse.cz; keydata= xsFNBFZdmxYBEADsw/SiUSjB0dM+vSh95UkgcHjzEVBlby/Fg+g42O7LAEkCYXi/vvq31JTB KxRWDHX0R2tgpFDXHnzZcQywawu8eSq0LxzxFNYMvtB7sV1pxYwej2qx9B75qW2plBs+7+YB 87tMFA+u+L4Z5xAzIimfLD5EKC56kJ1CsXlM8S/LHcmdD9Ctkn3trYDNnat0eoAcfPIP2OZ+ 9oe9IF/R28zmh0ifLXyJQQz5ofdj4bPf8ecEW0rhcqHfTD8k4yK0xxt3xW+6Exqp9n9bydiy tcSAw/TahjW6yrA+6JhSBv1v2tIm+itQc073zjSX8OFL51qQVzRFr7H2UQG33lw2QrvHRXqD Ot7ViKam7v0Ho9wEWiQOOZlHItOOXFphWb2yq3nzrKe45oWoSgkxKb97MVsQ+q2SYjJRBBH4 8qKhphADYxkIP6yut/eaj9ImvRUZZRi0DTc8xfnvHGTjKbJzC2xpFcY0DQbZzuwsIZ8OPJCc LM4S7mT25NE5kUTG/TKQCk922vRdGVMoLA7dIQrgXnRXtyT61sg8PG4wcfOnuWf8577aXP1x 6mzw3/jh3F+oSBHb/GcLC7mvWreJifUL2gEdssGfXhGWBo6zLS3qhgtwjay0Jl+kza1lo+Cv BB2T79D4WGdDuVa4eOrQ02TxqGN7G0Biz5ZLRSFzQSQwLn8fbwARAQABzSBWbGFzdGltaWwg QmFia2EgPHZiYWJrYUBzdXNlLmN6PsLBlAQTAQoAPgIbAwULCQgHAwUVCgkICwUWAgMBAAIe AQIXgBYhBKlA1DSZLC6OmRA9UCJPp+fMgqZkBQJkBREIBQkRadznAAoJECJPp+fMgqZkNxIQ ALZRqwdUGzqL2aeSavbum/VF/+td+nZfuH0xeWiO2w8mG0+nPd5j9ujYeHcUP1edE7uQrjOC Gs9sm8+W1xYnbClMJTsXiAV88D2btFUdU1mCXURAL9wWZ8Jsmz5ZH2V6AUszvNezsS/VIT87 AmTtj31TLDGwdxaZTSYLwAOOOtyqafOEq+gJB30RxTRE3h3G1zpO7OM9K6ysLdAlwAGYWgJJ V4JqGsQ/lyEtxxFpUCjb5Pztp7cQxhlkil0oBYHkudiG8j1U3DG8iC6rnB4yJaLphKx57NuQ PIY0Bccg+r9gIQ4XeSK2PQhdXdy3UWBr913ZQ9AI2usid3s5vabo4iBvpJNFLgUmxFnr73SJ KsRh/2OBsg1XXF/wRQGBO9vRuJUAbnaIVcmGOUogdBVS9Sun/Sy4GNA++KtFZK95U7J417/J Hub2xV6Ehc7UGW6fIvIQmzJ3zaTEfuriU1P8ayfddrAgZb25JnOW7L1zdYL8rXiezOyYZ8Fm ZyXjzWdO0RpxcUEp6GsJr11Bc4F3aae9OZtwtLL/jxc7y6pUugB00PodgnQ6CMcfR/HjXlae h2VS3zl9+tQWHu6s1R58t5BuMS2FNA58wU/IazImc/ZQA+slDBfhRDGYlExjg19UXWe/gMcl De3P1kxYPgZdGE2eZpRLIbt+rYnqQKy8UxlszsBNBFsZNTUBCACfQfpSsWJZyi+SHoRdVyX5 J6rI7okc4+b571a7RXD5UhS9dlVRVVAtrU9ANSLqPTQKGVxHrqD39XSw8hxK61pw8p90pg4G /N3iuWEvyt+t0SxDDkClnGsDyRhlUyEWYFEoBrrCizbmahOUwqkJbNMfzj5Y7n7OIJOxNRkB IBOjPdF26dMP69BwePQao1M8Acrrex9sAHYjQGyVmReRjVEtv9iG4DoTsnIR3amKVk6si4Ea X/mrapJqSCcBUVYUFH8M7bsm4CSxier5ofy8jTEa/CfvkqpKThTMCQPNZKY7hke5qEq1CBk2 wxhX48ZrJEFf1v3NuV3OimgsF2odzieNABEBAAHCwXwEGAEKACYCGwwWIQSpQNQ0mSwujpkQ PVAiT6fnzIKmZAUCZAUSmwUJDK5EZgAKCRAiT6fnzIKmZOJGEACOKABgo9wJXsbWhGWYO7mD 8R8mUyJHqbvaz+yTLnvRwfe/VwafFfDMx5GYVYzMY9TWpA8psFTKTUIIQmx2scYsRBUwm5VI EurRWKqENcDRjyo+ol59j0FViYysjQQeobXBDDE31t5SBg++veI6tXfpco/UiKEsDswL1WAr tEAZaruo7254TyH+gydURl2wJuzo/aZ7Y7PpqaODbYv727Dvm5eX64HCyyAH0s6sOCyGF5/p eIhrOn24oBf67KtdAN3H9JoFNUVTYJc1VJU3R1JtVdgwEdr+NEciEfYl0O19VpLE/PZxP4wX PWnhf5WjdoNI1Xec+RcJ5p/pSel0jnvBX8L2cmniYnmI883NhtGZsEWj++wyKiS4NranDFlA HdDM3b4lUth1pTtABKQ1YuTvehj7EfoWD3bv9kuGZGPrAeFNiHPdOT7DaXKeHpW9homgtBxj 8aX/UkSvEGJKUEbFL9cVa5tzyialGkSiZJNkWgeHe+jEcfRT6pJZOJidSCdzvJpbdJmm+eED w9XOLH1IIWh7RURU7G1iOfEfmImFeC3cbbS73LQEFGe1urxvIH5K/7vX+FkNcr9ujwWuPE9b 1C2o4i/yZPLXIVy387EjA6GZMqvQUFuSTs/GeBcv0NjIQi8867H3uLjz+mQy63fAitsDwLmR EP+ylKVEKb0Q2A== In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 39E10180020 X-Stat-Signature: 67okhfp8bcqeeouz8pqz6uwqyohqifzy X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1727355278-233154 X-HE-Meta: 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 11RD5+Ep 1I1cEtVV+pK9CH1qtI8/J7ljF8NC2PNSte6yXQ9yykPIdQODFqD3qYkwylVPu6E9s22zzPxyhyWvVHe8epJPwmNao5dJ5TR+Qvjn2vaiQ2xHQt1J9poKlESnCaJ2zhivDrvQ/N2mZdyre9hpvVU9PD7u4nq1KDFE+vx1XvKDkhA/jqe/X7S9S3mDQdWGbpEciZHXMV+HZrLGwM1foAE1QrQkKP735ScDBRtm7Xwb1gmR21llmZugREVAlULbJfTw3B+4Wph/t4lhzvPr24pKg6UMHIfZvzY0JCYJQjlrqICGE2hWga8L1HRRA4gdT9x9g5WkUp+uS5V90PEc31CUoRYDMgruIbiVEUE3TFbplOm9yU5H3z/u06w36C7sI/AGb5JbEyOYLCqU5+yw87g7lLGe6iX9zGUpUHd+FgdJUSxjFaPzuHoIrzmBxkB8WuRf9mXc1hibPcAPBpr3u1buOM8ERo1W6xdoNBzZGGeT1Z3UvCIA= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 9/25/24 14:56, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > On Sun, Sep 22, 2024 at 11:13 PM Guenter Roeck wrote: >> >> On 9/21/24 23:16, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: >> > On Sun, Sep 22, 2024 at 6:25 AM Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> >> >> >> On 9/21/24 23:08, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> >>> On 9/21/24 13:40, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> >>>> +CC kunit folks >> >>>> >> >>>> On 9/20/24 15:35, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> >>>>> Hi, >> >>>> >> >>>> Hi, >> >>>> >> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 12:31:20PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> >>>>>> Add a test that will create cache, allocate one object, kfree_rcu() it >> >>>>>> and attempt to destroy it. As long as the usage of kvfree_rcu_barrier() >> >>>>>> in kmem_cache_destroy() works correctly, there should be no warnings in >> >>>>>> dmesg and the test should pass. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Additionally add a test_leak_destroy() test that leaks an object on >> >>>>>> purpose and verifies that kmem_cache_destroy() catches it. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka >> >>>>> >> >>>>> This test case, when run, triggers a warning traceback. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> kmem_cache_destroy TestSlub_kfree_rcu: Slab cache still has objects when called from test_leak_destroy+0x70/0x11c >> >>>>> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 715 at mm/slab_common.c:511 kmem_cache_destroy+0x1dc/0x1e4 >> >>>> >> >>>> Yes that should be suppressed like the other slub_kunit tests do. I have >> >>>> assumed it's not that urgent because for example the KASAN kunit tests all >> >>>> produce tons of warnings and thus assumed it's in some way acceptable for >> >>>> kunit tests to do. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> I have all tests which generate warning backtraces disabled. Trying to identify >> >>> which warnings are noise and which warnings are on purpose doesn't scale, >> >>> so it is all or nothing for me. I tried earlier to introduce a patch series >> >>> which would enable selective backtrace suppression, but that died the death >> >>> of architecture maintainers not caring and people demanding it to be perfect >> >>> (meaning it only addressed WARNING: backtraces and not BUG: backtraces, >> >>> and apparently that wasn't good enough). >> >> >> >> Ah, didn't know, too bad. >> >> >> >>> If the backtrace is intentional (and I think you are saying that it is), >> >>> I'll simply disable the test. That may be a bit counter-productive, but >> >>> there is really no alternative for me. >> >> >> >> It's intentional in the sense that the test intentionally triggers a >> >> condition that normally produces a warning. Many if the slub kunit test do >> >> that, but are able to suppress printing the warning when it happens in the >> >> kunit context. I forgot to do that for the new test initially as the warning >> >> there happens from a different path that those that already have the kunit >> >> suppression, but we'll implement that suppression there too ASAP. >> > >> > We might also need to address the concern of the commit >> > 7302e91f39a ("mm/slab_common: use WARN() if cache still has objects on >> > destroy"), >> > the concern that some users prefer WARN() over pr_err() to catch >> > errors on testing systems >> > which relies on WARN() format, and to respect panic_on_warn. >> > >> > So we might need to call WARN() instead of pr_err() if there are errors in >> > slub error handling code in general, except when running kunit tests? >> > >> >> If people _want_ to see WARNING backtraces generated on purpose, so be it. >> For me it means that _real_ WARNING backtraces disappear in the noise. >> Manually maintaining a list of expected warning backtraces is too maintenance >> expensive for me, so I simply disable all kunit tests which generate >> backtraces on purpose. That is just me, though. Other testbeds may have >> more resources available and may be perfectly happy with the associated >> maintenance cost. >> >> In this specific case, I now have disabled slub kunit tests, and, as >> mentioned before, from my perspective there is no need to change the >> code just to accommodate my needs. I'll do the same with all other new >> unit tests which generate backtraces in the future, without bothering >> anyone. >> >> Sorry for the noise. > > I don't think this was a noise :) IMO some people want to see WARNING > during testing to catch errors, > but not for the slub_kunit test case. I think a proper approach here > would be suppressing > warnings while running slub_kunit test cases, but print WARNING when > it is not running slub_kunit test cases. > > That would require some work changing the slub error reporting logic > to print WARNING on certain errors. > Any opinions, Vlastimil? Yes, we should suppress the existing warning on kmem_cache_destroy() in kunit test context, and separately we can change pr_err() to WARN() as long as they are still suppressed in kunit test context. > Thanks, > Hyeonggon