linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] selftests/kcmp: Always try to build the 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1417499634.31336.9.camel@concordia>
Date:	Tue, 02 Dec 2014 16:53:54 +1100
From:	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, shuahkh@....samsung.com,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] selftests/kcmp: Always try to build the test

On Thu, 2014-10-23 at 10:09 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 04:07:14PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > Don't prevent the test building on non-x86. Just try and build it and
> > let the chips fall where they may.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
> 
> kcmp depends on checkpoint/restore config symbol which is known
> to work on x86 and (iirc) on arm, that's why x86 was only allowed.
> I don't mind to such change but not sure.
 
Yeah I understand. It's helpful for the other architectures to be able to build
the test, that way we at least know that it's something we should think about
implementing/fixing. If the test doesn't build at all then we just ignore it :)

cheers


--
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/