linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests:firmware: fixes a call to a wrong function name

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:30:51 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Jeffrin Jose T <ahiliation@...oo.co.in>,
        "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jeffrin Jose T <jeffrin@...agiritech.edu.in>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests:firmware: fixes a call to a wrong function name

On 04/25/2018 09:26 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 09:39:02AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 7:10 AM, Jeffrin Jose T <ahiliation@...oo.co.in> wrote:
>>>  This is a patch to the tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh
>>>  file which fixes a bug which calls to a wrong function name,which in turn
>>>  blocks the execution of certain tests.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeffrin Jose T <jeffrin@...agiritech.edu.in>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>  tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh
>>> index 06d638e9dc62..cffdd4eb0a57 100755
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh
>>> @@ -66,5 +66,5 @@ if [ -f $FW_FORCE_SYSFS_FALLBACK ]; then
>>>         run_test_config_0003
>>>  else
>>>         echo "Running basic kernel configuration, working with your config"
>>> -       run_test
>>> +       run_tests
>>>  fi
>>
>> I find it confusing that run_tests() uses $1 and $2 but later ignores
>> them unless -f $FW_FORCE_SYSFS_FALLBACK, which is checked at both the
>> top level and in proc_set_*_fallback()... I'd expected the test to
>> happen only in run_tests() and have it removed from from
>> proc_set_*_fallback().
>>
>> Regardless, the above patch is correct to run the tests. :)
> 
> Thanks, I'll go queue this up.
> 
> greg k-h
> 

Thanks. This probably has dependency on firmware tree.

Acked-by: Shuah Khan (Samsung OSG) <shuah@...nel.org>

-- Shuah