linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] bitmap: Add bitmap_zero()/bitmap

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 11 Jan 2018 14:32:38 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] bitmap: Add bitmap_zero()/bitmap_clear() test
 cases

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 15:07 +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 03:11:45PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 12:34 +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > 

> > > I don't understand what patch #4 is doing in this series. At the
> > > first
> > > glance, it may be applied separately.
> > 
> > It fixes test failures found by patch 2 in the series.
> > The idea is similar to TDD.
> 
> So with current order, patch 2 introduces regression that is fixed in
> patch 4, is my understanding correct?

I'm sorry to ask, but do you call new test cases "a regression" for
real?!

> This is not the best idea because it will break bisectability.

Huh?

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy