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]
Date:   Fri, 21 Jan 2022 18:01:18 -0500
From:   Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
To:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
Cc:     davidgow@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        skhan@...uxfoundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] kunit: factor out kunit_base_assert_format() call
 into kunit_fail()

On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 11:59 AM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> We call this function first thing for all the assertion `format()`
> functions.
> This is the part that prints the file and line number and assertion type
> (EXPECTATION, ASSERTION).
>
> Having it as part of the format functions lets us have the flexibility
> to not print that information (or print it differently) for new
> assertion types, but I think this we don't need that.
>
> And in the future, we'd like to consider factoring that data (file,
> line#, type) out of the kunit_assert struct and into a `static`
> variable, as Linus suggested [1], so we'd need to extract it anyways.
>
> [1] https://groups.google.com/g/kunit-dev/c/i3fZXgvBrfA/m/VULQg1z6BAAJ
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>

Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ