On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 10:02:56AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Some unit tests intentionally trigger warning backtraces by passing > bad parameters to API functions. Such unit tests typically check the > return value from those calls, not the existence of the warning backtrace. > > Such intentionally generated warning backtraces are neither desirable > nor useful for a number of reasons. > - They can result in overlooked real problems. > - A warning that suddenly starts to show up in unit tests needs to be > investigated and has to be marked to be ignored, for example by > adjusting filter scripts. Such filters are ad-hoc because there is > no real standard format for warnings. On top of that, such filter > scripts would require constant maintenance. > > One option to address problem would be to add messages such as "expected > warning backtraces start / end here" to the kernel log. However, that > would again require filter scripts, it might result in missing real > problematic warning backtraces triggered while the test is running, and > the irrelevant backtrace(s) would still clog the kernel log. > > Solve the problem by providing a means to identify and suppress specific > warning backtraces while executing test code. > > Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Daniel Diaz <daniel.diaz@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Yup, this looks fine to me. Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Kees Cook
