linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: kvm: Adding config fragments

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 9 Aug 2019 13:05:59 +0530
From:   Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        sean.j.christopherson@...el.com,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: kvm: Adding config fragments

On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 at 21:30, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 08/08/19 17:10, Andrew Jones wrote:
> >>
> > What does the kselftests config file do? I was about to complain that this
> > would break compiling on non-x86 platforms, but 'make kselftest' and other
> > forms of invoking the build work fine on aarch64 even with this config
> > file. So is this just for documentation? If so, then its still obviously
> > wrong for non-x86 platforms. The only config that makes sense here is KVM.
> > If the other options need to be documented for x86, then should they get
> > an additional config file? tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86_64/config?
>
> My understanding is that a config file fragment requires some kind of
> kconfig invocation to create a full .config file.  When you do that,
> unknown configurations are dropped silently.

You are right on this point. As you said, unknown configs getting dropped for
arm64 cross compilation.

- Naresh