[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612BA4B89908@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 14:07:05 +0000
From: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] kcov: convert kcov.refcount to refcount_t
> Just to check, has this been tested with CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL and
> > something poking kcov?
> >
> > Given lib/refcount.c is instrumented, the refcount_*() calls will
> > recurse back into the kcov code. It looks like that's fine, given these
> > are only manipulated in setup/teardown paths, but it would be nice to be
> > sure.
>
> A simple program using KCOV is available here:
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.0-rc3/source/Documentation/dev-
> tools/kcov.rst#L42
> or here (it's like strace but collects and prints KCOV coverage):
> https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/tools/kcovtrace/kcovtrace.c
>
No, this one hasn't gone via any particular testing apart
the tests that zero day runs automatically (like boot tests, etc.) since normally
it is hard for me to know how exactly to test a particular component in a meaningful
way.
But I can try to test with the above example now, if it helps!
Best Regards,
Elena.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists