linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 3/3] drm/tests: bridge: add KUnit tests for devm_drm_bridge

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: <20250605203158.0846e8de@booty>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 20:31:58 +0200
From: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Thomas Zimmermann
 <tzimmermann@...e.de>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter
 <simona@...ll.ch>, Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@...el.com>, Neil Armstrong
 <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, Robert Foss <rfoss@...nel.org>, Laurent
 Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, Jonas Karlman
 <jonas@...boo.se>, Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, Anusha
 Srivatsa <asrivats@...hat.com>, Paul Kocialkowski <paulk@...-base.io>,
 Dmitry Baryshkov <lumag@...nel.org>, Hervé Codina
 <herve.codina@...tlin.com>, Hui Pu <Hui.Pu@...ealthcare.com>, Thomas
 Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/3] drm/tests: bridge: add KUnit tests for
 devm_drm_bridge_alloc()

Hello Maxime,

thanks for reviewing this series.

On Tue, 27 May 2025 18:10:31 +0200
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org> wrote:

[...]

> > @@ -422,11 +424,93 @@ static struct kunit_suite drm_bridge_helper_reset_crtc_test_suite = {
> >  	.test_cases = drm_bridge_helper_reset_crtc_tests,
> >  };
> >  
> > +struct drm_bridge_alloc_test_ctx {  
> 
> drm_bridge_alloc_priv
> 
> > +	struct device *dev;
> > +	struct dummy_drm_bridge *dummy_br;
> > +	bool destroyed;  
> 
> This can be in drm_bridge_priv

Not really, because drm_bridge_priv will be freed just after calling
.destroy, and we need .destroyed after the free happened.

[...]

> > +static const struct drm_bridge_funcs drm_bridge_dummy_funcs = {
> > +	.destroy = dummy_drm_bridge_destroy,
> > +};  
> 
> And same here, you don't need to create yet another function set, just
> add it to the existing ones.

OK, but it implies further changes.

In this version of this patch, the alloc tests being introduced use
drm_bridge_alloc_priv, while the other tests using the existing
function sets rely on drm_bridge_init_priv which has different fields.
So if all tests will call .destroy, we always need a valid struct
pointer for drm_bridge_priv.data.

Based on this, I think the only solution is to not introduce
drm_bridge_alloc_priv, and instead put its members (struct device *dev and bool
destroyed) to drm_bridge_init_priv, and then use drm_bridge_init_priv
for all tests.

The change is not very invasive, and perhaps even a cleanup, thus I'm
going to send as above in v9.

I'm OK with all the other changes you proposed. All queued for v9.

Luca

-- 
Luca Ceresoli, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com