* Uriel Guajardo <urielguajardojr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Uriel Guajardo <urielguajardo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> KUnit will fail tests upon observing a lockdep failure. Because lockdep
> turns itself off after its first failure, only fail the first test and
> warn users to not expect any future failures from lockdep.
>
> Similar to lib/locking-selftest [1], we check if the status of
> debug_locks has changed after the execution of a test case. However, we
> do not reset lockdep afterwards.
>
> Like the locking selftests, we also fix possible preemption count
> corruption from lock bugs.
> --- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> +void kunit_check_lockdep(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_lockdep *lockdep) {
> + int saved_preempt_count = lockdep->preempt_count;
> + bool saved_debug_locks = lockdep->debug_locks;
> +
> + if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(preempt_count() != saved_preempt_count))
> + preempt_count_set(saved_preempt_count);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS
> + if (softirq_count())
> + current->softirqs_enabled = 0;
> + else
> + current->softirqs_enabled = 1;
> +#endif
> +
> + if (saved_debug_locks && !debug_locks) {
> + kunit_set_failure(test);
> + kunit_warn(test, "Dynamic analysis tool failure from LOCKDEP.");
> + kunit_warn(test, "Further tests will have LOCKDEP disabled.");
> + }
So this basically duplicates what the boot-time locking self-tests do,
in a poor fashion?
Instead of duplicating unit tests, the right solution would be to
generalize the locking self-tests and use them both during bootup and
in kunit.
Thanks,
Ingo
