2012/11/22 Johannes Berg <[email protected]>: > This idea has been floating around in my head for a long time now ... > > I was thinking: what if we could do fault injection during regular > testing, at least on those code paths that are not supposed to have side > effects when they fail? Now obviously this isn't all code paths, and > many probably erroneously *do* have side effects even if they're not > supposed to, but it does apply to a number of code paths.
It sounds interesting. I have never thought of this idea. > So I decided to play with this, and the result it the patch below. It > adds a new knob "recoverable-only" to the slab and page_alloc fault > attributes. If enabled, then a single fault can be injected if the task > executing it is in a "recoverable section", this is implemented by some > new fields in struct task_struct and the (very ugly!) macro > FAULT_INJECT_CALL_RECOVERABLE_FUNCTION. I suggest introducing a pair of function like: void fault_recoverable_enable(unsigned long fault_ids); void fault_recoverable_disable(); fault_recoverable_enable() sets current task's recoverable state to the value specified with the argument. fault_recoverable_disable() resets the recoverable state. I think this can be more readable than FAULT_INJECT_CALL_RECOVERABLE_FUNCTION macro. In case of nl80211_remain_on_channel(), you can just put them in exit and entrance: fault_recoverable_enable(FAULT_ATTR_SLAB | FAULT_ATTR_PAGE_ALLOC); ... fault_recoverable_disable(); return err; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
