Hi,
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 05:27:17PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> 'days' is a s64 (from div_s64), and so should use a %lld specifier.
>
> This was found by extending KUnit's assertion macros to use gcc's
> __printf attribute.
>
> Fixes: 276010551664 ("time: Improve performance of time64_to_tm()")
>
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 05:27:18PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> 'days' is a s64 (from div_s64), and so should use a %lld specifier.
>
> This was found by extending KUnit's assertion macros to use gcc's
> __printf attribute.
>
> Fixes: 1d1bb12a8b18 ("rtc: Improve performance of rtc_time64_to_tm().
On 2/21/24 05:26, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 17:19:54 -0700 Shuah Khan wrote:
On 2/19/24 06:53, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 09:15:15 -0300 Marcos Paulo de Souza
wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 14:35:16 +0800 kernel test robot wrote:
Hi Marcos,
ker
Adrian Moreno writes:
> On 2/16/24 16:28, Aaron Conole wrote:
>> Normally a spawned process under OVS is given a SIGTERM when the test
>> ends as part of cleanup. However, in case the process is still lingering
>> for some reason, we also send a SIGKILL to force it down faster.
>> Signed-off-by:
Resending misc fixes for DAMON selftets on behalf of the original
authors for more visibility and inclusion on mm tree.
The patches are same to their original versions, except added Links: for
the original posts, and Signed-off-by: of mine.
Javier Carrasco (1):
selftests: damon: add access_memo
From: Vincenzo Mezzela
This patch resolves a spelling error in the test log, preventing potential
confusion.
It is submitted as part of my application to the "Linux Kernel
Bug Fixing Spring Unpaid 2024" mentorship program of the Linux
Foundation.
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240204122523.
From: Javier Carrasco
This binary is missing in the .gitignore and stays as an untracked file.
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240214-damon_selftest_gitignore-v1-1-f517d0f9f...@gmail.com
Reported-by: Bernd Edlinger
Closes:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/as8p193mb1285c963658008f1b2702af7e4...@a
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 12:25 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 12:18 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 11:22 AM Edgecombe, Rick P
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2024-02-21 at 14:06 -0500, dal...@libc.org wrote:
> > > > Due to arbitrarily nestable signal frames, no, t
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 05:27:19PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> KUNIT_FAIL() accepts a printf-style format string, but previously did
> not let gcc validate it with the __printf() attribute. The use of %lld
> for the result of PTR_ERR() is not correct.
>
> Instead, use %pe and pass the actual err
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 05:27:20PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> The drm_buddy_test's alloc_contiguous test used a u64 for the page size,
> which was then updated to be an 'unsigned long' to avoid 64-bit
> multiplication division helpers.
>
> However, the variable is logged by some KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 05:39:55PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 2/20/24 7:54 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > Replace deprecated 0-length array in struct bpf_lpm_trie_key with
> > flexible array. Found with GCC 13:
> >
> > ../kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:207:51: warning: array subscript i is outside
> > a
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 05:39:55PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> The build in BPF CI is still broken, did you try to build selftests?
Okay, I give up. How is a mortal supposed to build these?
If I try to follow what I see in
https://github.com/libbpf/ci/blob/main/build-selftests/build_selftests
On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 14:12:00 -0700 Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 2/21/24 05:26, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 17:19:54 -0700 Shuah Khan
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 2/19/24 06:53, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 09:15:15 -0300 Marcos Paulo de Souza
> >>> wrot
Replace deprecated 0-length array in struct bpf_lpm_trie_key with
flexible array. Found with GCC 13:
../kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:207:51: warning: array subscript i is outside array
bounds of 'const __u8[0]' {aka 'const unsigned char[]'} [-Warray-bounds=]
207 |
Hello:
This series was applied to netdev/net.git (main)
by Jakub Kicinski :
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 17:17:28 +0100 you wrote:
> There are multiple bugs in tls_sw_recvmsg's handling of record types
> when MSG_PEEK flag is used, which can lead to incorrectly merging two
> records:
> - consecutive non-
---
on arm64 KVM_CAP_GUEST_MEMDF capability is not enabled, but
guest_memfd_test can build on arm64, let's build it on arm64 as well.
Signed-off-by: Itaru Kitayama
---
tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 08:44:35PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 22:21 -0800, de...@rivosinc.com wrote:
+ /*
+ * PROT_SHADOWSTACK is a kernel only protection flag on risc-
v.
+ * mmap doesn't expect PROT_SHADOWSTACK to be set by user
space.
+ *
On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 04:13:39PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 10:21:43PM -0800, de...@rivosinc.com wrote:
To allow userspace to enable this feature for itself, following prtcls are
defined:
- PR_GET_INDIR_BR_LP_STATUS: Gets current configured status for indirect branch
On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 04:01:28PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 10:21:40PM -0800, de...@rivosinc.com wrote:
As discussed extensively in the changelog for the addition of this
syscall on x86 ("x86/shstk: Introduce map_shadow_stack syscall") the
existing mmap() and madvise() s
On Tuesday, 20 February 2024 01:01:59 CST Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024, at 23:38, Elizabeth Figura wrote:
> > NtWaitForMultipleObjects() can receive a timeout in two forms, relative or
> > absolute. Relative timeouts are unaffected by changes to the system time
> > and do
> > not co
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 08:44:53PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 22:21 -0800, de...@rivosinc.com wrote:
From: Deepak Gupta
As discussed extensively in the changelog for the addition of this
syscall on x86 ("x86/shstk: Introduce map_shadow_stack syscall") the
existing mm
On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 11:34:59AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 25.01.24 18:07, Deepak Gupta wrote:
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 09:18:07AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 25.01.24 07:21, de...@rivosinc.com wrote:
From: Deepak Gupta
x86 has used VM_SHADOW_STACK (alias to VM_HIGH_ARCH_5)
les/?
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> This would be a regression to automated test rings. Do you have any other
> > >> solutions?
> > >
> > > I would say that we could skip the these tests if kernel-devel package is
> > > not
> > > installed. Would it be acceptable? At least we would avoid such issues
> > > like this
> > > in the future as well.
> > >
> >
> > We have to check and skip build. Something we could do in the livepatch
> > Makefile. Can you send patch for this - I will oull this in for next
> > so we don't break test rings.
>
> I added a new patch in the same patchset that would cover this, skipping the
> build and test if kernel-devel is not installed. The patchset was sent earlier
> today. Please check if the new patch fixes things on the build robot.
Hi Shuah, Hi Marcos,
Sorry for this wrong report. The files are organized in a different way
in the bot and cause this issue. We have fixed the bot to explicitly
set KDIR to the correct path before building the selftests. The patch
[1] can also work well in bot's environment.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240221-lp-selftests-fixes-v2-2-a19be1e02...@suse.com/
Best Regards,
Yujie
/lib/modules/?
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> This would be a regression to automated test rings. Do you have any
> > > >> other
> > > >> solutions?
> > > >
> > > > I would say that we could skip the t
Remove redundant "set up" comment and add check to ensure enough data is
swapped out (in swapin test) and zswapped-in.
Suggested-by: Yosry Ahmed
Signed-off-by: Nhat Pham
---
tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_zswap.c | 12 +---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --gi
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 05:27:21PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
KUNIT_FAIL() is used to fail the xe_migrate test when an error occurs.
However, there's a mismatch in the format specifier: '%li' is used to
log 'err', which is an 'int'.
Use '%i' instead of '%li', and for the case where we're printing a
On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 at 21:05, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>
> this has a potential to cause conflicts with upcoming work, so I think
> it's better to apply this through drm-xe-next. Let me know if you agree.
I disagree. Violently.
For this to be fixed, we need to have the printf format checking enabl
On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 at 04:10, 'Justin Stitt' via KUnit Development
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 05:27:15PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> > The correct format specifier for p - n (both p and n are pointers) is
> > %td, as the type should be ptrdiff_t.
>
> I think %tu is better. d specifie
The config fragment doesn't follow the correct format to enable those
config options which make the config options getting missed while
merging with other configs.
➜ merge_config.sh -m .config tools/testing/selftests/iommu/config
Using .config as base
Merging tools/testing/selftests/iommu/config
➜
101 - 129 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
