[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200831113238.b6b38076bb02076458592a3d@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 11:32:38 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: albert.linde@...il.com
Cc: bp@...en8.de, mingo@...hat.com, corbet@....net, tglx@...utronix.de,
arnd@...db.de, peterz@...radead.org, akinobu.mita@...il.com,
hpa@...or.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, glider@...gle.com,
andreyknvl@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com, elver@...gle.com,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Albert van der Linde <alinde@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] add fault injection to user memory access
On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 17:17:30 +0000 albert.linde@...il.com wrote:
> The goal of this series is to improve testing of fault-tolerance in
> usages of user memory access functions, by adding support for fault
> injection.
Does anyone actually plan to use this feature, on an ongoing basis?
It's the sort of thing which the various test robots could exploit, but
I'm not sure that they are using fault injection?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists