linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/damon: make selftests executable

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: <9a7f8d0b-3f0f-8584-6c12-423b0d5a979d@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 18 Feb 2022 15:20:03 -0700
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@...gle.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Markus Boehme <markubo@...zon.de>, rientjes@...gle.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/damon: make selftests executable

On 2/18/22 1:24 AM, SeongJae Park wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:01:11 +0100 Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 07:52:54AM +0000, SeongJae Park wrote:
>>> Hello Yuanchu,
>>>
>>> Thank you for this patch!
>>>
>>> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 00:10:17 +0000 Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The damon selftests do not have the executable bit on. We fix that by
>>>> setting the x bits on the .sh files similar to other existing shell
>>>> selftests.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 9ab3b0c8ef62 ("selftests/damon: split test cases")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@...gle.com>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
>>
>> This type of change does not work outside of git, so why not just make
>> the tool that calls these scripts not care about the executable bit like
>> we do for other scripts?
> 
> Actually, we made kselftest receives scripts having no executable bit[1],
> though it still prints warning.  I guess Yuanchu wants to remove the warning?
> 
> To remove the warning, simply making kselftest (runner.sh) stop printing the
> warning message might make more sense.  Nevertheless, it's also true that
> letting some scripts have executable bits while others not looks inconsistent
> to me.  That's why I left the warning message there.  Should we remove the
> warning from kselftest and remove executable bits from other selftest test
> scripts?  Or, let the inconsistency be?  I have no real opinion here, so just
> wanted to hear others' opinion if possible.
> 

I don't recall why we decided to add the check in runner.sh - let's keep them
consistent with the rest of the scripts. If we get rid of the check, we can
make the change then.

thanks,
-- Shuah