[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202002111120.91782E0686@keescook>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:21:29 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Dmitry Monakhov <dmtrmonakhov@...dex-team.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/test_lockup: test module to generate lockups
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 03:57:42PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> On 11/02/2020 04.26, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:56:31PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > > CONFIG_TEST_LOCKUP=m adds module "test_lockup" that helps to make sure
> > > that watchdogs and lockup detectors are working properly.
> >
> > Isn't this all already possible with CONFIG_LKDTM ?
>
> Yep, LKDTM covers some cases. But they are unrecoverable.
>
> It seems LKDTM is more like a fixed set of unit tests while
> test_lockup is a flexible tool for stress load.
Okay, cool. I just wanted to make sure you'd seen LKDTM and there wasn't
too much wheel-reinvention happening. :) Thanks for checking!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists