Hi all! On 05.05.2023 09:58, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 1 May 2023 15:02:37 -0700 > Peter Collingbourne <pcc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > "ftrace" is really for just the function tracing, but CONFIG_FTRACE > > > > really should just be for the function tracing infrastructure, and > > > > perhaps not even include trace events :-/ But at the time it was > > > > created, it was for all the "tracers" (this was added before trace > > > > events). > > > > > > It would be great to see this cleaned up. I found this aspect of how > > > tracing works rather confusing. > > > > > > So do you think it makes sense for the KASAN tests to "select TRACING" > > > for now if the code depends on the trace event infrastructure? > > > > Any thoughts? It looks like someone else got tripped up by this: > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D144057 > > Yeah, it really does need to get cleaned up, but unfortunately it's not > going to be a trivial change. We need to make sure it's done in a way that > an old .config still keeps the same things enabled with the new config > settings. That takes some trickery in the dependency. > > I'll add this to my todo list, hopefully it doesn't fall into the abyss > portion of that list :-p > > -- Steve Just adding to Peter's concern re: CONFIG_KASAN_KUNIT_TEST's dependency on CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS. I'm having no luck running the KASan KUnit tests on arm64 with the following .kunitconfig on v6.6.0: CONFIG_KUNIT=y CONFIG_KUNIT_ALL_TESTS=n CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL=y CONFIG_KASAN=y CINFIG_KASAN_GENERIC=y CONFIG_KASAN_KUNIT_TEST=y CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS, which CONFIG_KASAN_TEST relies on since the patch this thread is based on, isn't defined for arm64, AFAICT. If I comment out the dependency on CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS, the tests appear to run, but KUnit isn't picking up the KASan output. If I revert the patch, the above .kunitconfig appears to work fine on arm64 and the tests pass. The above .kunitconfig works as intended on X86, no changes necessary. Am I missing something? Many thanks, Paul
