[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5f9b35b4-09fa-a8a9-3181-cd8cd7898d03@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 08:59:53 +0200
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
To: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Maíra Canal <maira.canal@....br>,
Isabella Basso <isabbasso@...eup.net>, magalilemes00@...il.com,
tales.aparecida@...il.com, mwen@...lia.com, andrealmeid@...eup.net,
siqueirajordao@...eup.net, Trevor Woerner <twoerner@...il.com>,
leandro.ribeiro@...labora.com, n@...aprado.net,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
michal.winiarski@...el.com,
José Expósito <jose.exposito89@...il.com>,
David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, brendanhiggins@...gle.com,
kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/9] drm: selftest: convert drm_format selftest to
KUnit
On 7/15/22 02:03, Daniel Latypov wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 4:51 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 05:30:47PM -0300, Maíra Canal wrote:
>>> Considering the current adoption of the KUnit framework, convert the
>>> DRM format selftest to the KUnit API.
>>>
>>> Tested-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
>>> Acked-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <maira.canal@....br>
>>
>> This patch results in:
>>
>> Building powerpc:allmodconfig ... failed
>> --------------
>> Error log:
>> drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_format_test.c: In function 'igt_check_drm_format_min_pitch':
>> drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_format_test.c:271:1: error: the frame size of 3712 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes
>>
>> presumably due to function nesting.
>
> This can happen when there's a lot of KUNIT_EXPECT_* calls in a single function.
> See [1] for some related context.
> There were a number of patches that went into 5.18 ([2] and others) to
> try and mitigate this, but it's not always enough.
>
> Ideally the compiler would see that the stack-local variables used in
> these macros don't need to stick around, but it doesn't always
> happen...
Thanks Daniel for the explanation.
> One workaround would be to split up the test case functions into smaller chunks.
>
Maíra,
Could you please look at splitting in smaller chunks to mitigate this issue ?
--
Best regards,
Javier Martinez Canillas
Linux Engineering
Red Hat
Powered by blists - more mailing lists