linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/14] KVM: selftests: Use a single binary for dirty/clear log test

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: <20200205173939.GD378317@xz-x1>
Date:   Wed, 5 Feb 2020 12:39:39 -0500
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To:     Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dinechin@...hat.com, sean.j.christopherson@...el.com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, jasowang@...hat.com, yan.y.zhao@...el.com,
        mst@...hat.com, kevin.tian@...el.com, alex.williamson@...hat.com,
        dgilbert@...hat.com, vkuznets@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/14] KVM: selftests: Use a single binary for
 dirty/clear log test

On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 06:11:09PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 10:46:17AM -0500, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 10:28:52AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:58:38PM -0500, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > > Remove the clear_dirty_log test, instead merge it into the existing
> > > > dirty_log_test.  It should be cleaner to use this single binary to do
> > > > both tests, also it's a preparation for the upcoming dirty ring test.
> > > > 
> > > > The default test will still be the dirty_log test.  To run the clear
> > > > dirty log test, we need to specify "-M clear-log".
> > > 
> > > How about keeping most of these changes, which nicely clean up the
> > > #ifdefs, but also keeping the separate test, which I think is the
> > > preferred way to organize and execute selftests. We can use argv[0]
> > > to determine which path to take rather than a command line parameter.
> > 
> > Hi, Drew,
> > 
> > How about we just create a few selftest links that points to the same
> > test binary in Makefile?  I'm fine with compiling it for mulitple
> > binaries too, just in case the makefile trick could be even easier.
> 
> I think I prefer the binaries. That way they can be selectively moved
> and run elsewhere, i.e. each test is a standalone test.

Sure, will do.

-- 
Peter Xu