linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: add 7 tests for memcmp()

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, 21 Oct 2022 19:20:26 +0200
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: add 7 tests for memcmp()

On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 10:07:38AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > I see. In the worst case, a preliminary "make clean" will do it. We just
> > need to decide what's the best solution for everyone (i.e. not waste too
> > much time between tests while not getting misleading results by accident).
> 
> Maybe just document the careful/slow way, then people doing it more
> frequently can do it the clever/fast way.
> 
> My guess is that the careful/slow is this:
> 
> 	pushd tools/include/nolibc
> 	make clean
> 	make
> 	popd
> 	pushd tools/testing/selftests/nolibc
> 	make clean
> 	make -j32 run
> 
> Or did I miss a turn in there somewhere?

It's even easier, you don't even need the clean phase in include/nolibc.
I'm doing this and it's sufficient:

  make -C tools/testing/selftests/nolibc clean
  make -C tools/testing/selftests/nolibc nolibc-test
  tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test

Or for the test under QEMU, which involves a kernel build:

  make -C tools/testing/selftests/nolibc clean
  make -C tools/testing/selftests/nolibc -j $(nproc) run

Where would you first look for such a hint ? Maybe the help output of
the default "make" command could send as a hint that a clean is needed
after patching nolibc and that could be sufficient ? I just want to make
sure users don't waste their time trying to find what they could be doing
wrong.

Willy