linux-kernel - Re: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] drm/tests: managed: Add a simple test for drmm_managed

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <fcwozeyyg5didfpiy42kn5vscrktt6exi55hio2lba5s6btitm@n7slxall6y63>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:11:57 +0100
From: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@...el.com>
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
CC: <intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>, Michal
 Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@...el.com>, Maarten Lankhorst
	<maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
	David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, "Javier
 Martinez Canillas" <javierm@...hat.com>, Maíra Canal
	<mcanal@...lia.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] drm/tests: managed: Add a simple test for
 drmm_managed_release

On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 04:56:27PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 11:13:24AM +0100, Michał Winiarski wrote:
> > Add a simple test that checks whether the action is indeed called right
> > away and that it is not called on the final drm_dev_put().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@...el.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c
> > index c1fc1f0aac9b2..91863642efc13 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c
> > @@ -41,6 +41,33 @@ static void drm_test_managed_run_action(struct kunit *test)
> >  	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE_MSG(test, priv->action_done, "Release action was not called");
> >  }
> >  
> > +/*
> > + * The test verifies that the release action is called immediately when
> > + * drmm_release_action is called and that it is not called for a second time
> > + * when the device is released.
> > + */
> > +static void drm_test_managed_release_action(struct kunit *test)
> > +{
> > +	struct managed_test_priv *priv = test->priv;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	ret = drmm_add_action_or_reset(priv->drm, drm_action, priv);
> > +	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
> > +
> > +	ret = drm_dev_register(priv->drm, 0);
> > +	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
> > +
> > +	drmm_release_action(priv->drm, drm_action, priv);
> > +	KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE_MSG(test, priv->action_done, "Release action was not called");
> > +	priv->action_done = false;
> > +
> > +	drm_dev_unregister(priv->drm);
> > +	drm_kunit_helper_free_device(test, priv->drm->dev);
> > +
> > +	KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE_MSG(test, priv->action_done,
> > +			       "Unexpected release action call during cleanup");
> > +}
> > +
> 
> I guess we can have something simpler if we switch action_done to a
> counter and just check that the counter didn't increase.
> 
> And I think the custom messages should be removed there too.
> 
> Maxime

I'll drop the custom messages here and in the previous patch.

I'll also simplify this test in the way you suggested in previous
revision, to not check for release action call on cleanup.

Thanks,
-Michał