On Sun 2025-01-19 22:02:38, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote:
> Some arch configs (like ppc64) enable CONFIG_PRINTK_CALLER,
> which adds the caller id as part of the dmesg. With recent
> util-linux's update 467a5b3192f16 ('dmesg: add caller_id support')
> the standard "dmesg" has been enhanced to print PR
+[T789] livepatch: 'test_klp_livepatch': completing unpatching transition
> +[T789] livepatch: 'test_klp_livepatch': unpatching complete
> +[ T3659] % rmmod test_klp_livepatch
>
> ERROR: livepatch kselftest(s) failed
> not ok 1 selftests: livepatch: te
On Thu 2025-01-16 08:10:44, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 1/16/25 04:29, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Tue 2025-01-14 20:01:44, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote:
> >> Some arch configs (like ppc64) enable CONFIG_PRINTK_CALLER, which
> >> adds the caller id as part of the dmesg. Due to
On Tue 2025-01-14 20:01:44, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote:
> Some arch configs (like ppc64) enable CONFIG_PRINTK_CALLER, which
> adds the caller id as part of the dmesg. Due to this, even though
> the expected vs observed are same, end testcase results are failed.
CONFIG_PRINTK_CALLER is not the only
On Sat 2024-12-21 01:05:36, Siddharth Menon wrote:
> Currently, kselftests does not have a generalised mechanism to skip
> compilation
> and run tests when required kernel configuration flags are missing.
>
> This patch introduces a check to validate the presence of required config
> flags
> spe
On Sat 2024-12-21 01:05:35, Siddharth Menon wrote:
> This patch adds a script to validate that the current kernel configuration
> satisfies the requirements for selftests. The script compares the current
> kernel configs against the required selftest configs.
>
> A config mismatch exits with error
On Tue 2024-12-10 22:40:51, BiscuitBobby wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 20:26, Petr Mladek wrote:
> >
> > What is the reason to add another set of dependencies, please?
>
> I had done this because not every test required all the options specified in
> tools/testing/self
On Thu 2024-12-05 17:17:56, Siddharth Menon wrote:
> Currently, kselftests does not have a generalised mechanism to skip
> compilation
> and run tests when required kernel configuration flags are missing.
>
> This patch introduces a check to validate the presence of required config
> flags
> spe
On Wed 2024-11-06 23:11:20, Siddharth Menon wrote:
> When CONFIG_LIVEPATCH is disabled, compilation fails due to the
> required structs from the livepatch header file being undefined.
> This checks for CONFIG_LIVEPATCH in order to verify that
> it is enabled before compiling livepatch self-tests.
>
On Tue 2024-09-17 15:50:53, Michael Vetter wrote:
> The test proves that a function that is being kprobed and uses a
> post_handler cannot be livepatched.
>
> Only one ftrace_ops with FTRACE_OPS_FL_IPMODIFY set may be registered
> to any given function at a time.
>
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/t
Hi,
JFYI, I have committed the patch into livepatching.git,
branch for-6.11/selftests-fixup.
Few nits below :-)
On Fri 2024-08-23 09:09:26, Ryan B. Sullivan wrote:
> Changes from v2:
>
> Adds:
> Reported-by: CKI Project
> Closes:
> https://datawarehouse.cki-project.org/kcidb/tests
nly one moduled listed, found $nmods"
>
> # These modules were disabled by the atomic replace
> for mod in $MOD_LIVEPATCH3 $MOD_LIVEPATCH2 $MOD_LIVEPATCH1; do
Otherwise, it looks good to me. With the added references:
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek
Best Regards,
Petr
PS: No need to resend the patch. I would add the references when
committing. I am going to wait few more days before committing.
On Mon 2024-06-03 14:26:19, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
> Adapt the current test-livepatch.sh script to account the number of
> applied livepatches and ensure that an atomic replace livepatch disables
> all previously applied livepatches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza
JFYI, the patch
he test.
But it is not worth another respin. I am going to push this version
(with the typo fixed).
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek
Best Regards,
Petr
On Thu 2024-06-06 09:53:48, Ryan Sullivan wrote:
> Define a maximum allowable number of pids that can be livepatched in
> test-syscall.sh as with extremely large machines the output from a
> large number of processes overflows the dev/kmsg "expect" buffer in
> the "check_result" function and causes
On Fri 2024-05-31 18:06:48, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-05-31 at 15:44 -0400, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> > On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 11:34:08AM -0300, Marcos Paulo de Souza
> > wrote:
> > > Adapt the current test-livepatch.sh script to account the number of
> > > applied livepatches and en
;check_result" function and causes a false error.
>
> Reported-by: CKI Project
> Signed-off-by: Ryan Sullivan
Looks reasonable.
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek
Best Regards,
Petr
PS: I am going to queue it for 6.11. I will add it into
a pull request for 6.10-rcX if there will be anoth
ouza
I am not completely sure if it is a good idea to test so many
aspects and use so many different test modules in a single test.
It might be harder to maintain and analyze eventual problems.
But the change will help to catch more problems which is good.
I am fine with it:
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek
to create random
> locations when the livepatch gets enabled. Nothing is guarantted.
> The magic is in the randomness.
>
> Reviewed-by: Joe Lawrence
> Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek
Best Regards,
Petr
epatched kernel function.
>
>
> Reviewed-by: Joe Lawrence
> Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza
Looks good and works for me.
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek
Best Regards,
Petr
n
> the files created by Kbuild to compile the modules. The new install
> rule copies only the .ko files, as we would expect the gen_tar to work.
>
> Reviewed-by: Joe Lawrence
> Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza
I am not export on kbuild. But it looks reasonable and works for me.
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek
Best Regards,
Petr
On Tue 2023-12-19 09:50:18, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 12/19/23 04:45, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 05:44:54PM -0500, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> >
> >> @@ -280,7 +268,13 @@ function set_pre_patch_ret {
> >> function start_test {
> >>local test="$1"
> >>
> >> - save_dmesg
>
On Fri 2023-12-08 09:06:30, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > > My idea is to abandon this way completely, take the selftests and build
> > > and run them on the system right away.
> > >
> > > Both should be doable, hopefully, if we wire it all correctly... and
> > > document it.
> > >
> > I can't thin
23 matches
Mail list logo
