linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] locking-selftest: add option to proceed through unexpected failures

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: <20201117100256.GC3121406@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Tue, 17 Nov 2020 11:02:56 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Jim Cromie <jim.cromie@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking-selftest: add option to proceed through
 unexpected failures

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 04:00:48PM -0700, Jim Cromie wrote:
> Locking selftest is currently (v.5.10-rc3) seeing 14 unexpected failures.
> Add option to not disable debug_locks, so as to let it reveal any
> locking flaws in new unrelated work.

I'm assuming this is the arm64 fallout? Mark anything I can do to help
you there?

The reasoning doesn't make sense though; if it can't pass the selftest,
then why would you trust any further reports?