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:   Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:31:15 -0700
From:   Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rcutorture: Fix rcu_barrier successes counter

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:22:15PM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> 
> rcutorture currently increments both successes and error counters for
> the rcu_barrier test incase of errors. It should only increment the
> error counter incase of errors so make it do so.
> 
> Test: Introduced rcu_barrier errors by returning from the barrier
> callback without incrementing the callback counter.

Hi Paul,
Think some more about this counter, I think you mean 'successes' as in
'successful attempts' than 'successful test' ? If so, then perhaps you can
drop this patch. It wasn't clear to me what the 'successes' meant so I may
have been a bit misled into changing its meaning. If on the other hand, it
means 'successful test', then yes this patch would be Ok then. thanks! -Joel
 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ