linux-kernel - Re: Locking API testsuite: Failures

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080827064551.GE6255@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 27 Aug 2008 08:45:51 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Peter Teoh <htmldeveloper@...il.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Locking API testsuite: Failures


* Peter Teoh <htmldeveloper@...il.com> wrote:

> Several questions:

[...]
> 3.  My current .config (which gave rise to the failure errors) [...]

You should have read this bit of the self-test printout:

[    0.004000] 133 out of 218 testcases failed, as expected. |

there was no unexpected failure. A real test-case failure is displayed 
as: 'FAILED', and you'll get a verbose printout about the unexpected 
testcase failures.

> 1.   I noticed there is a Kconfig.debug with this entry:
> 
> config DEBUG_LOCKING_API_SELFTESTS
>         bool "Locking API boot-time self-tests"
>         depends on DEBUG_KERNEL
>         help
>           Say Y here if you want the kernel to run a short self-test during
>           bootup. The self-test checks whether common types of locking bugs
>           are detected by debugging mechanisms or not. (if you disable
>           lock debugging then those bugs wont be detected of course.)
>           The following locking APIs are covered: spinlocks, rwlocks,
>           mutexes and rwsems.
> 
> How do I use this Kconfig.debug, just overwriting the standard
> lib/Kconfig? [...]

no, that messes up the kernel. Kconfig.debug is a separate, unique 
kconfig file with debugging related options.

> 2.   So does it make sense to  compile with
> CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKING_API_SELFTESTS without CONFIG_LOCKDEP?

yes. It shows the kinds of bugs we dont find when PROVE_LOCKING is 
disabled. It also shows that the test-cases are working as expected.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/