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: <CALAqxLUbhaq4+KTrjj=_FG7xq-yzME44noXhgn1ND0C-6HBdOw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 2 Apr 2015 11:02:11 -0700
From:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
Cc:	Tyler Baker <tyler.baker@...aro.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: timers: Make set-timer-lat fail more
 gracefully for !CAP_WAKE_ALARM

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:18 AM, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 03/26/2015 01:33 PM, Tyler Baker wrote:
>> I realize this may be a good amount of work, so I'd like to help out.
>> Perhaps working John to convert his timer tests to use TAP output
>> would be a good starting point?
>
> John, I could probably do that for you.  I'm always willing to give it a shot.

I took a quick look into it, since I'm definitely interested in
improving output formatting, but man, TAP is a fairly ugly output
format if you ask me.

It only has binary "ok" or "not ok" (why not "fail", or something else
that's exclusively grep-able, I don't know). So I'm not sure if cases
where functionality is unsupported should be a pass or fail.

Most problematically: It seems to want enumeration in the test output
(so test 2 needs to print: "ok 2 Test complete") which means either
there needs to be a wrapper that does the TAP output knowing which
test of N its currently running, or the test number needs to be
submitted as an runtime argument to the test, and the test then has to
add it to its output line.

Anyway, if we do want to go with that format,  I suspect it should be
something we add to the kselftest pass/fail hooks, rather then to the
individual tests. Then its just a matter of prefixing normal test
output with #'s so they can be ignored by the parser.

thanks
-john
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ