Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Jan 2023 18:51:14 +0530 | From | "Naveen N. Rao" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] selftests/ftrace: Extend multiple_kprobes.tc to add multiple consecutive probes in a function |
| |
Akanksha J N wrote: > Commit 97f88a3d723162 ("powerpc/kprobes: Fix null pointer reference in > arch_prepare_kprobe()") fixed a recent kernel oops that was caused as > ftrace-based kprobe does not generate kprobe::ainsn::insn and it gets > set to NULL. > Extend multiple kprobes test to add kprobes on first 256 bytes within a > function, to be able to test potential issues with kprobes on > successive instructions. > The '|| true' is added with the echo statement to ignore errors that are > caused by trying to add kprobes to non probeable lines and continue with > the test. > > Signed-off-by: Akanksha J N <akanksha@linux.ibm.com> > --- > .../selftests/ftrace/test.d/kprobe/multiple_kprobes.tc | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
Thanks for adding this test!
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/kprobe/multiple_kprobes.tc b/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/kprobe/multiple_kprobes.tc > index be754f5bcf79..f005c2542baa 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/kprobe/multiple_kprobes.tc > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/kprobe/multiple_kprobes.tc > @@ -25,6 +25,10 @@ if [ $L -ne 256 ]; then > exit_fail > fi > > +for i in `seq 0 255`; do > + echo p $FUNCTION_FORK+${i} >> kprobe_events || true > +done > + > cat kprobe_events >> $testlog > > echo 1 > events/kprobes/enable
Thinking about this more, I wonder if we should add an explicit fork after enabling the events, similar to kprobe_args.tc: ( echo "forked" )
That will ensure we hit all the probes we added. With that change: Acked-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
- Naveen
| |