linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] rbtree: performance and correctness test

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]

Message-Id: <20120713154519.60a686e8.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Fri, 13 Jul 2012 15:45:19 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Cc:	aarcange@...hat.com, dwmw2@...radead.org, riel@...hat.com,
	peterz@...radead.org, daniel.santos@...ox.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] rbtree: performance and correctness test

On Fri, 13 Jul 2012 15:33:35 -0700
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 17:31:50 -0700 Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com> wrote:
> >>  Makefile            |    2 +-
> >>  lib/Kconfig.debug   |    1 +
> >>  tests/Kconfig       |   18 +++++++
> >>  tests/Makefile      |    1 +
> >>  tests/rbtree_test.c |  135 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > This patch does a new thing: adds a kernel self-test module into
> > lib/tests/ and sets up the infrastructure to add new kernel self-test
> > modules in that directory.
> >
> > I don't see a problem with this per-se, but it is a new thing which we
> > should think about.
> >
> > In previous such cases (eg, kernel/rcutorture.c) we put those modules
> > into the same directory as the code which is being tested.  So to
> > follow that pattern, this new code would have gone into lib/.
> >
> > If we adopt your new proposal then we should perhaps also move tests
> > such as rcutorture over into tests/.  And that makes one wonder whether
> > we should have a standalone directory for kernel selftest modules.  eg
> > tests/self-test-nmodules/.
> 
> Ah, I did not realize we had a precedent for in-tree kernel test modules.

hm, well, just because that's what we do now doesn't mean that it was a
good idea ;) These things arrive as a result of individual developers
doing stuff in their little directories and no particular thought was
put into overall structure.

It could be that it would be better to put all these tests into a
central place, rather than sprinkling them around the tree.  If so,
then your patch can lead the way, and we (ie: I) prod past and future
developers into getting with the program.

otoh, perhaps in-kernel test modules will rely on headers and constants
which are private to the implementation directory.  So perhaps
sprinkled-everywhere is the best approach.

> I don't think my proposal was significantly better than this
> precedent, so I'll just adjust my patch to conform to it:
> - move rbtree_test.c to lib/
> - modify just lib/Makefile and lib/Kconfig.debug to get the module built.
> 
> Will send a replacement patch for this (so you can drop that one patch
> from the stack and replace it with)

OK, you could do that too.  That way you avoid the problem and we can
worry about it later (if ever), as a separate activity.
--
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/