linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: selftests: Use TAP interface in the kvm_binary_stats

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]

Message-ID: <Yz9/UsWtYimt2T1D@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 7 Oct 2022 01:22:26 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Andrew Jones <andrew.jones@...ux.dev>
Cc:     Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: selftests: Use TAP interface in the
 kvm_binary_stats_test

On Wed, Oct 05, 2022, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 11:31:29AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > The kvm_binary_stats_test test currently does not have any output (unless
> > one of the TEST_ASSERT statement fails), so it's hard to say for a user
> > how far it did proceed already. Thus let's make this a little bit more
> > user-friendly and include some TAP output via the kselftest.h interface.
> 
> I like the idea of switching the entire kvm selftests framework and all
> tests to the ksft TAP interface. But, if we want to do that, then the
> question is whether we should start by partially using it for some tests,
> and then eventually switch over the framework, or whether we should try to
> switch everything at once.
> 
> I think I prefer the latter, because without changing the framework we
> can't provide full TAP anyway as TEST_ASSERT exits with 254 instead of 1
> for a fail-exit and it doesn't output a final TAP test summary either.

I would much prefer the latter, e.g. with common entry/exit points[*], much of the
boilerplate can be done once in common code.  I bet we could even figure out a way
to have tests default to setting a plan of '1' so that simple tests don't need to
care about TAP at all.

[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220915000448.1674802-2-vannapurve@google.com