[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240531032425.3635dc93@rorschach.local.home>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 03:24:25 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>, LKML
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Trace Kernel
<linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] tracing: Fix some selftest issues
On Fri, 31 May 2024 11:37:21 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
> So, in summary, it is designed to be a module. Steve, I think these tests
> should be kept as modules. There are many reason to do so.
>
> - This test is designed to be used as module.
> - This can conflict with other boot time selftest if it is embedded.
> - We can make these tests and boot time selftest mutable exclusive but
> if we make these tests as modules, we can build and run both tests
> safely.
> - Embedding these tests leave new events when the kernel boot, which
> user must be cleaned up by manual.
>
> What would you think?
I was mostly following what Ingo told me long ago, where having it
built in is just one more way to test it ;-)
But that said, from your first patch, you show the stack dump and
mention:
> Since the kprobes and synth event generation tests adds and enable
> generated events in init_module() and delete it in exit_module(),
> if we make it as built-in, those events are left in kernel and cause
> kprobe event self-test failure.
But you don't explain what exactly the conflict is. What about those
events causes kprobe selftests to fail?
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists