linux-kernel - RE: [RFC v1 0/6] kunit: create a centralized executor to dispatch all KUnit tests

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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 28 Jan 2020 19:35:36 +0000
From:   <Tim.Bird@...y.com>
To:     <frowand.list@...il.com>, <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
CC:     <mcgrof@...nel.org>, <jdike@...toit.com>, <richard@....at>,
        <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>, <arnd@...db.de>,
        <keescook@...omium.org>, <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
        <alan.maguire@...cle.com>, <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
        <davidgow@...gle.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        <sboyd@...nel.org>, <logang@...tatee.com>, <knut.omang@...cle.com>,
        <linux-um@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC v1 0/6] kunit: create a centralized executor to dispatch
 all KUnit tests



> -----Original Message-----
> From:  Frank Rowand on January 28, 2020 11:37 AM
> 
> On 1/28/20 1:19 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 9:40 AM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
...
> > we could add Kconfigs to control this, but the compiler nevertheless
> > complains because it doesn't know what phase KUnit runs in.
> >
> > Is there any way to tell the compiler that it is okay for non __init
> > code to call __init code? I would prefer not to have a duplicate
> > version of all the KUnit libraries with all the symbols marked __init.
> 
> I'm not sure.  The build messages have always been useful and valid in
> my context, so I never thought to consider that possibility.
> 
> > Thoughts?

I'm not sure there's a restriction on non __init code calling __init
code.  In init/main.c arch_call_reset_init() is in __init, and it calls
rest_init which is non __init, without any special handling.

Is the compiler complaint mentioned above related to  calling
into __init code, or with some other issue?
 -- Tim