linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] fat: Add KUnit tests for checksums and timestamps

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]

Message-ID: <878sc0i2ac.fsf@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Date:   Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:19:39 +0900
From:   OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
To:     David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fat: Add KUnit tests for checksums and timestamps

David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com> writes:

>> Hm, can this export only if FAT_KUNIT_TEST is builtin or module (maybe
>> #if IS_ENABLED(...))? And #if will also be worked as the comment too.
>>
>
> That's possible, but I'd prefer to export it unconditionally for two reasons:
> 1. It'd make it possible to build the fat_test module without having
> to rebuild the whole kernel/fat.
> 2. It'd be consistent with fat_time_unix2fat(), which is exported for
> use in vfat/msdos anyway.
>
> Neither of those are dealbreakers, though, so if you'd still prefer
> this to be behind an ifdef, I'll change it.

OK. If nobody complain, let's export. However, then, can you add the
comment instead of ifdef to mark for kunit?

Thanks.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>