linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

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:   Fri, 16 Jun 2017 09:10:04 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
To:     Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     keescook@...omium.org, decot@...glers.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

Hi Sumit,

On 06/15/2017 11:29 PM, Sumit Semwal wrote:
> With older kernels, printf.sh and bitmap.sh fail because they can't find
> the respective test modules they are looking for.
> 
> Add the skip portion on missing the respective test_XXX module. Error out
> the same way as prime_numbers.sh.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh | 5 +++++
>  tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh | 5 +++++
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh
> index 2da187b6ddad..85294b4a0861 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh
> @@ -1,6 +1,11 @@
>  #!/bin/sh
>  # Runs bitmap infrastructure tests using test_bitmap kernel module
>  
> +if ! /sbin/modprobe -q test_bitmap; then
> +        echo "bitmap: [SKIP]"
> +	exit 77
> +fi

Please add this logic below in the else clause instead of
adding duplicate block.

I think it is would be good to differentiate when a modules
isn't present vs. modprobe failed keying off of

"Module test_printf not found" message.

The second one can be separate patch.

> +
>  if /sbin/modprobe -q test_bitmap; then
>  	/sbin/modprobe -q -r test_bitmap
>  	echo "bitmap: ok"
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh
> index 4fdc70fe6980..024e749a83d4 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh
> @@ -1,6 +1,11 @@
>  #!/bin/sh
>  # Runs printf infrastructure using test_printf kernel module
>  
> +if ! /sbin/modprobe -q test_printf; then
> +        echo "printf: [SKIP]"
> +	exit 77
> +fi

Please add this logic below in the else clause instead of
adding duplicate block.

I think it is would be good to differentiate when a modules
isn't present vs. modprobe failed keying off of

"Module test_printf not found" message.

The second one can be separate patch.

> +
>  if /sbin/modprobe -q test_printf; then
>  	/sbin/modprobe -q -r test_printf
>  	echo "printf: ok"
> 

thanks,
-- Shuah