linux-kernel - Re: RFC - kernel selftest result documentation (KTAP)

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: <202006191208.BF995C82F5@keescook>
Date:   Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:11:15 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        "Bird, Tim" <Tim.Bird@...y.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        "shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: RFC - kernel selftest result documentation (KTAP)

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 01:47:29PM -0500, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 2020-06-16 18:58, Kees Cook wrote:
> > I proposed fixing that recently[1]. seccomp uses XFAIL for "I have
> > detected you lack the config to test this, so I can't say it's working
> > or not, because it only looks like a failure without the config."
> 
> Based on that description, the case sounds like it should be a skip.

hrm hrm. Yeah. Thinking more about this, I agree. I think it came about
this way because the kselftest_harness.h API (not TAP output) is different from the
kselftest.h API (TAP output), and so the tests were written with what
was available in kselftest_harness.h which has no "SKIP" idea.

The series linked was mostly built to bring kselftest_harness.h into the
TAP output universe, so the XFAIL -> SKIP mapping needs to be included
as well.

> Or if the entire test depends on the missing config then Bail out might
> be appropriate.
> 
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200611224028.3275174-7-keescook@chromium.org/

I will rework this series.

-- 
Kees Cook