linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][next] selftests/x86: fix spelling mistake "FAILT" -> "FAIL"

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: <63f05151-bc25-b19b-61de-7f907fd1c282@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 1 Jul 2019 11:59:25 -0600
From:   shuah <shuah@...nel.org>
To:     wharms@....de, Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, shuah <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] selftests/x86: fix spelling mistake "FAILT" ->
 "FAIL"

On 7/1/19 7:12 AM, walter harms wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 01.07.2019 15:04, schrieb Colin King:
>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>>
>> There is an spelling mistake in an a test error message. Fix it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>> ---
>>   tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c
>> index 4602326b8f5b..a4f4d4cf22c3 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_vsyscall.c
>> @@ -451,7 +451,7 @@ static int test_vsys_x(void)
>>   		printf("[OK]\tExecuting the vsyscall page failed: #PF(0x%lx)\n",
>>   		       segv_err);
>>   	} else {
>> -		printf("[FAILT]\tExecution failed with the wrong error: #PF(0x%lx)\n",
>> +		printf("[FAIL]\tExecution failed with the wrong error: #PF(0x%lx)\n",
>>   		       segv_err);
>>   		return 1;
>>   	}
> 
> 
> "wrong error" sounds like scratching table, perhaps "error" is here sufficient ?
> Bomus points when user is expected to report this.
> 

Just "error" would not accurate her. I think the intent is to say
that syscall returned an invalid error code. "Invalid error code"
would be accurate.


It would be helpful to report the expected error code.

thanks,
-- Shuah