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  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]
Date:   Thu, 23 Nov 2017 16:07:25 +0200
From:   Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, criu@...nvz.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...tuozzo.com>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Andrei Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] test: add a test for the process_vmsplice syscall

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 09:01:03AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 09:36:31PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > From: Andrei Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>
> > 
> > This test checks that process_vmsplice() can splice pages from a remote
> > process and returns EFAULT, if process_vmsplice() tries to splice pages
> > by an unaccessiable address.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andrei Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>
> > ---
> >  tools/testing/selftests/process_vmsplice/Makefile  |   5 +
> >  .../process_vmsplice/process_vmsplice_test.c       | 188 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 193 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/process_vmsplice/Makefile
> >  create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/process_vmsplice/process_vmsplice_test.c
> > 

[ ... ]

> 
> Shouldn't you check to see if the syscall is even present?  You should
> not error if it is not, as this test will then "fail" on kernels/arches
> without the syscall enabled, which isn't the nicest.

Sure, will fix.

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists