linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests/lib: set printf.sh executable

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]

Date:	Sat, 25 Jun 2016 08:56:17 +0900
From:	SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>
To:	Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>
Cc:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	adriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/lib: set printf.sh executable

Shuah,


May I ask your opinion about this patch?


Thanks,
SeongJae Park

On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 2:50 AM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 2:28 AM, SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com> wrote:
>> Test for test_printf module fails always because the test program,
>> printf.sh, has no execution permission.  This commit adds execution
>> permission to it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>
>
> Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>
> (Is this mode change sufficient, or does the selftest infrastructure
> need to explicitly set it executable when running?)
>
> -Kees
>
>
>> ---
>>  tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh | 0
>>  1 file changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>  mode change 100644 => 100755 tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh
>> old mode 100644
>> new mode 100755
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Kees Cook
> Chrome OS & Brillo Security