linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] iio: test: Add test for IIO_VAL_INT

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]

Date:   Fri, 5 Nov 2021 10:55:02 +0200
From:   Andriy Tryshnivskyy <andriy.tryshnivskyy@...nsynergy.com>
To:     Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Vasyl.Vavrychuk@...nsynergy.com, jbhayana@...gle.com,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        linux-iio <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] iio: test: Add test for IIO_VAL_INT_64.


On 05.11.21 10:50, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization.
> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender 
> and know the content is safe.
>
>
> On 11/5/21 9:45 AM, Andriy Tryshnivskyy wrote:
>> On 02.11.21 10:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>
>>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization.
>>> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
>>> sender and know the content is safe.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 9:33 AM Andriy Tryshnivskyy
>>> <andriy.tryshnivskyy@...nsynergy.com> wrote:
>>> Now it's good with format, but you have missed the commit message.
>>
>> Actually commit massage contains a header only (no body message), but
>> I can add body message too.
>> Thanks!
>>
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andriy Tryshnivskyy
>>>> <andriy.tryshnivskyy@...nsynergy.com>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> +static void iio_test_iio_format_value_integer_64(struct kunit *test)
>>>> +{
>>>> +       char *buf = kunit_kmalloc(test, PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
>>> Shouldn't this be checked against NULL?
>>
>> Good question. Truly speaking I've made new test similar to other. And
>> no other tests has a check for NULL.
>>
> The other tests not having it is my fault. There should be a
> KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, buf) under the allocation.
>
Understood. Then If you wouldn't mind I will add assert to other tests too.