lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 09:38:09 +0200 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Rafael Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, andreas.noever@...il.com, michael.jamet@...el.com, Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, YehezkelShB@...il.com, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>, "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, gregkh <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>, USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/6] kunit: build kunit tests without structleak plugin On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 8:10 AM Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com> wrote: > > The structleak plugin causes the stack frame size to grow immensely when > used with KUnit; this is caused because KUnit allocates lots of > moderately sized structs on the stack as part of its assertion macro > implementation. For most tests with small to moderately sized tests > cases there are never enough KUnit assertions to be an issue at all; > even when a single test cases has many KUnit assertions, the compiler > should never put all these struct allocations on the stack at the same > time since the scope of the structs is so limited; however, the > structleak plugin does not seem to respect the compiler doing the right > thing and will still warn of excessive stack size in some cases. > > These patches are not a permanent solution since new tests can be added > with huge test cases, but this serves as a stop gap to stop structleak > from being used on KUnit tests which will currently result in excessive > stack size. > > Of the following patches, I think the thunderbolt patch may be > unnecessary since Linus already fixed that test. Additionally, I was not > able to reproduce the error on the sdhci-of-aspeed test. Nevertheless, I > included these tests cases for completeness. Please see my discussion > with Arnd for more context[1]. > > NOTE: Arnd did the legwork for most of these patches, but did not > actually share code for some of them, so I left his Signed-off-by off of > those patches as I don't want to misrepresent him. Arnd, please sign off > on those patches at your soonest convenience. Thanks a lot for picking up this work where I dropped the ball. Patches 1-5 look good to me, and I replied on one remaining issue I see with patch 6. I think you did more work on these that I did, by doing a nice write-up and splitting them into separate patches with useful changelogs, you should keep authorship, and just change my S-o-b to Suggested-by. If you prefer to keep me as the author, then the correct way would be to commit them with --author= to ensure that the author and first s-o-b match. Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists