linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/17] nolibc: add preliminary self tests

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:   Wed, 20 Jul 2022 05:26:12 +0200
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc:     Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>,
        Alviro Iskandar Setiawan <alviro.iskandar@...weeb.org>,
        Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@...weeb.org>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/17] nolibc: add preliminary self tests

On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 03:49:47PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> But I do get "71 test(s) passed." when running on x86.  I will let you
> decide whether that constitutes all being well or indicates a bug in
> the tests.   ;-)

Technically speaking both are possible, but one is more likely :-)

> > The program can automatically modulate QEMU's return value on x86 when
> > QEMU is run with the appropriate options, but for now I'm not using it
> > as I felt like it didn't bring much value, and the output is more useful.
> > That's debatable, and maybe some might want to use it in bisect scripts
> > for example. It's too early to say IMHO.
> 
> For the moment, grepping the output works.  And perhaps indefinitely.

That's my intuition as well, given that there will always be a bit of
scripting around that anyway.

> This series is now on the -rcu tree's "dev" branch.

Thank you!

> I got two almost
> identical copies of patch 7, so I took the later of the two.  Please let
> me know if I guessed wrong.

Oh you're right, I'm sorry about that. I adjusted one commit message late
and failed to erase the previous one from the directory. In either case
we really don't care but I thought that the one mentioning "stdlib" which
is the term used in the test was better.

Thanks again for your time,
Willy