linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3] selftests/vm: Add protection_keys tests to run

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, 17 Jun 2022 13:31:52 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Kalpana Shetty <kalpana.shetty@....com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        shuah@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] selftests/vm: Add protection_keys tests to run_vmtests

On 6/17/22 5:10 AM, Kalpana Shetty wrote:
> Adding "protected_keys" tests to "run_vmtests.sh" would help out to run all VM related tests
> from a single shell script.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kalpana Shetty <kalpana.shetty@....com>
> ---
> Changes in V3:
>   Shuah Khan's review comments incorporated, added protection_keys binary check.
> 
>   tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh | 11 +++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh
> index 41fce8bea929..b19c6b1b84c4 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests.sh
> @@ -179,4 +179,15 @@ run_test ./ksm_tests -N -m 1
>   # KSM test with 2 NUMA nodes and merge_across_nodes = 0
>   run_test ./ksm_tests -N -m 0
>   
> +# protection_keys tests
> +if ./protection_keys_32 &> /dev/null
> +then
> +	run_test ./protection_keys_32
> +fi
> +
> +if ./protection_keys_64 &> /dev/null
> +then
> +	run_test ./protection_keys_64
> +fi
> +
>   exit $exitcode
> 

Why not use file test operators. -x works for this case.
There is no need to run attempt to run the test.

thanks,
-- Shuah