[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171227170910.5ac1074bc86341f194130119@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 17:09:10 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ast@...nel.org, kernel-team@...com, daniel@...earbox.net,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, darrick.wong@...cle.com,
Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 4/4] error-injection: Support fault
injection framework
On Tue, 26 Dec 2017 18:12:56 -0800
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 04:48:25PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Support in-kernel fault-injection framework via debugfs.
> > This allows you to inject a conditional error to specified
> > function using debugfs interfaces.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
> > ---
> > Documentation/fault-injection/fault-injection.txt | 5 +
> > kernel/Makefile | 1
> > kernel/fail_function.c | 169 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > lib/Kconfig.debug | 10 +
> > 4 files changed, 185 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 kernel/fail_function.c
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/fault-injection/fault-injection.txt b/Documentation/fault-injection/fault-injection.txt
> > index 918972babcd8..6243a588dd71 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/fault-injection/fault-injection.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/fault-injection/fault-injection.txt
> > @@ -30,6 +30,11 @@ o fail_mmc_request
> > injects MMC data errors on devices permitted by setting
> > debugfs entries under /sys/kernel/debug/mmc0/fail_mmc_request
> >
> > +o fail_function
> > +
> > + injects error return on specific functions by setting debugfs entries
> > + under /sys/kernel/debug/fail_function. No boot option supported.
>
> I like it.
> Could you document it a bit better?
Yes, I will do in next series.
> In particular retval is configurable, but without an example no one
> will be able to figure out how to use it.
Ah, right. BTW, as I pointed in the covermail, should we store the
expected error value range into the injectable list? e.g.
ALLOW_ERROR_INJECTION(open_ctree, -1, -MAX_ERRNO)
And provide APIs to check/get it.
const struct error_range *ei_get_error_range(unsigned long addr);
>
> I think you can drop RFC tag from the next version of these patches.
> Thanks!
Thank you, I'll fix some errors came from configurations, and resend it.
Thanks!
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists