Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-95928-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <adeac189-87f8-4b70-9c04-3eaaf2ed7bc5@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 18:22:55 +0100
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [RFC] How to test panic handlers, without crashing the kernel
Content-Language: en-US, fr
To: "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@igalia.com>,
 Michael Kelley <mhklinux@outlook.com>,
 John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
 "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
 Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
 Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>, Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
 Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
 Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
 Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
 David Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
References: <266579a9-fde6-40ff-b13d-fb2312db406c@redhat.com>
 <87edcpn1l3.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
 <15015345-3068-2fb8-aa38-f32acf27e1d0@igalia.com>
 <SN6PR02MB4157AF2E765F7ED3B9487351D4222@SN6PR02MB4157.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
 <d1d2093c-72a3-4f64-9a8f-9844dc38f0c5@redhat.com>
 <3d0c4180-aa6d-4519-d6d8-8f16b98587dc@igalia.com>
From: Jocelyn Falempe <jfalempe@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <3d0c4180-aa6d-4519-d6d8-8f16b98587dc@igalia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


On 05/03/2024 18:50, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> On 05/03/2024 13:52, Jocelyn Falempe wrote:
>> [...]
>> Or maybe have two lists of panic notifiers, the safe and the destructive
>> list. So in case of fake panic, we can only call the safe notifiers.
>>
> 
> I tried something like that:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220427224924.592546-1-gpiccoli@igalia.com/
> 
> There were many suggestions, a completely refactor of the idea (panic
> lists are not really seen as reliable things).

Thanks for sharing this, so it's much more complex than what I though.
> 
> Given that, I'm not really sure splitting in lists gonna fly; maybe
> restricting the test infrastructure to drm_panic plus some paths of
> panic would be enough for this debugfs interface, in principle? I mean,
> to unblock your work on the drm panic stuff.

For drm_panic, I changed the way the debugfs is calling the drm_panic 
functions in the last version:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/581845/?series=122244&rev=9

It doesn't use the panic notifier list, but create a file for each plane 
of each device directly.
It allows to test the panic handler, not in a real panic condition, but 
that's still better than nothing.

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> Guilherme
> 

Best regards,

-- 

Jocelyn