linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] lib: Convert test

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201202094408.GW4077@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Dec 2020 11:44:08 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Arpitha Raghunandan <98.arpi@...il.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
        kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] lib: Convert test_hexdump.c to KUnit

On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 09:51:19AM +0530, Arpitha Raghunandan wrote:
> On 01/12/20 4:36 pm, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 9:21 AM Arpitha Raghunandan <98.arpi@...il.com> wrote:

...

> >> I ran both the original and converted tests as is to produce the
> >> output for success of the test in the two cases. I also ran these
> >> tests with a small modification to show the difference in the output
> >> for failure of the test in both cases. The modification I made is:
> >>  static const char * const test_data_4_le[] __initconst = {
> >> -       "7bdb32be", "b293180a", "24c4ba70", "9b34837d",
> >> +       "7bdb32be", "b293180a", "24c4ba70", "9b3483d",
> >>
> >> The difference in outputs can be seen here:
> >> https://gist.github.com/arpi-r/38f53a3c65692bf684a6bf3453884b6e
> > 
> > Looks pretty much good, what I'm sad to see is the absence of the test
> > statistics. Any ideas if we can get it back?
> > 
> 
> I could again include variable total_tests as was in the original test.
> Would that be fine?

What I;m talking about is the output. How it will be implemented (using the
same variable or differently) is up to you. So the point is I want to see the
statistics of success/total at the end.

I think this should be done in KUNIT rather than in the individual test cases.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko