[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191217082449.GC54407@google.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 17:24:49 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kconfig: Add kernel config option for fuzz testing.
On (19/12/17 08:54), Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 6:12 AM Sergey Senozhatsky
> <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On (19/12/16 18:59), Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >
> > Can you fuzz test with `ignore_loglevel'?
>
> We can set ignore_loglevel in syzbot configs, but won't it then print
> everything including verbose debug output?
What would be the most active source of debug output?
dev_dbg(), which is dev_printk(KERN_DEBUG), can be compiled out, if I'm
not mistaken. It probably depends on CONFIG_DEBUG or something similar,
unlike dev_printk(), which depends on CONFIG_PRINTK. It seems that we have
significantly more dev_dbg() users, than direct dev_printk(KERN_DEBUG).
Does fuzz tester hit pr_debug() often? File systems? Some of them
have ways to compile out debugging output as well. E.g. jbd_debug,
_debug, ext4_debug, and so on.
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists