linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dmatest: masking tests for channel capabilities

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: <CAHp75VdxO_hpSHSu+KsHWo8s7MFb=QqdYXuihSNSLLUXU1ykyg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:57:04 +0300
From:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:	Dan Williams <djbw@...com>
Cc:	Jubin Mehta <jubin.mehta@...el.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
	Jon Mason <jon.mason@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmatest: masking tests for channel capabilities

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Dan Williams <djbw@...com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Dan Williams <djbw@...com> wrote:
>>> +Example to perform only MEMCPY and PQ mode tests (0x01 | 0x04 = 0x05):
>>> +
>>> +        % modprobe dmatest
>>> +        % echo dma0chan0 > /sys/kernel/debug/dmatest/channel
>>> +        % echo 5  > /sys/kernel/debug/dmatest/cap_mask
>>> +        % echo 1 > /sys/kernel/debug/dmatest/iterations
>>> +        % echo 1 > /sys/kernel/debug/dmatest/run
>>
>>
>> Hmmm, I should have paid more attention when the debugfs support was
>> initially proposed for dmatest.  As it is I see duplication and
>> configuration parameters getting out of sync with their module parameter
>> equivalents versus just having all configuration go through module
>> parameters.  module_param_call() can be used for the more complex options.
>> Debugfs at this point looks like overkill for what amounts to some simple
>> configuration variables and a result line.

There two main issues we fight against:
 - test automation, where we can collect results and use them later
 - annoying modprobe / modprobe -r for each test case

The module parameters were left to support old behaviour of the module.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
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/