Thread (52 messages) flat view 52 messages, 2 authors, 5d ago

Re: [PATCH v10 27/38] dyndbg-test: add do_bulk testpoint, rename do_prints to do_classes

From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
Date: 2026-09-16 16:37:33
Also in: dri-devel

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] test_dynamic_debug: unkillable process in do_bulk and do_classes
--

commit 6245dc1853df17e050ea8032572222d30c017fd7
Author: Jim Cromie [off-list ref]

dyndbg-test: add do_bulk testpoint, rename do_prints to do_classes

This commit introduces a do_bulk testpoint and renames do_prints to
do_classes in the test_dynamic_debug module. These changes allow generating
high-volume workloads with a single sysfs write to better support testing of
dynamic debug features.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/lib/test_dynamic_debug.c b/lib/test_dynamic_debug.c
index 01ce07001d4c7..560e23f14ac8f 100644
--- a/lib/test_dynamic_debug.c
+++ b/lib/test_dynamic_debug.c
[ ... ]
-static void do_prints(void)
+static void do_classes(unsigned int ct)
 {
-	pr_debug("do_prints:\n");
-	do_cats();
-	do_levels();
+	/* maybe clamp this */
+	pr_debug("do_classes %u times:\n", ct);
+	for (; ct; ct--) {
+		do_cats();
+		do_levels();
+		cond_resched();
[Severity: Medium]
Can this loop in do_classes() run indefinitely without checking for signals?

If a large integer (e.g., UINT_MAX) is written to the do_classes sysfs
parameter, the lack of fatal_signal_pending() or signal_pending() prevents
the test from being gracefully aborted via SIGKILL or SIGINT. This could
trap the process in kernel space and flood syslog/journald.
+	}
+}
+
+static void do_bulk(unsigned int ct)
+{
+	unsigned int i;
+
+	pr_debug("do_bulk %u times:\n", ct);
+	for (i = 0; i < ct; i++) {
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.0\n", i + 1);
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.1\n", i + 1);
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.2\n", i + 1);
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.3\n", i + 1);
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.4\n", i + 1);
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.5\n", i + 1);
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.6\n", i + 1);
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.7\n", i + 1);
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.8\n", i + 1);
+		pr_debug("bulk msg %u.9\n", i + 1);
+		cond_resched();
[Severity: Medium]
Similarly, does this loop in do_bulk() also need a signal check?

A process writing a large value to the do_bulk sysfs parameter could
become unkillable for an extended period, preventing process termination.
+	}
 }
-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260916-dd-cmap-part2-clean-v10-0-af4cf4767707@gmail.com?part=27
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help