On Sat, 15 Aug 2026 19:10:34 +0000
[email protected] wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
> > index 0356cae0cf74e..207f47f54dbbf 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
> > @@ -3866,6 +3866,8 @@ static __init void event_test_stuff(void)
> > struct task_struct *test_thread;
> >
> > test_thread = kthread_run(event_test_thread, NULL, "test-events");
> > + if (IS_ERR(test_thread))
> > + return;
>
> [Severity: Medium]
> Does returning silently here cause the self-test framework to falsely report
> success when the workload thread cannot be created?
>
> The caller event_trace_self_tests() unconditionally prints "OK" after calling
> this function:
>
> kernel/trace/trace_events.c:event_trace_self_tests() {
> ...
> ftrace_event_enable_disable(file, 1);
> event_test_stuff();
> ftrace_event_enable_disable(file, 0);
>
> pr_cont("OK\n");
> }
> ...
> }
>
> Should event_test_stuff() propagate the error so that the caller can correctly
> report the test failure or skip it appropriately?
Right, this is just a boot up test that is only done for debugging.
This is not something for production. If it fails, it should not fail
silently. If anything, it should be:
if (WARN_ON(IS_ERR(test_thread))
return;
-- Steve
