linux-kernel - Re: nolibc: KTAP output and test reports

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: <c6d3cabb-84f9-4f00-bfdd-de6810ed4c99@t-8ch.de>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jul 2023 09:31:06 +0200
From:   Thomas Weißschuh <thomas@...ch.de>
To:     Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Zhangjin Wu <falcon@...ylab.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: nolibc: KTAP output and test reports

Hi Willy,

On 2023-06-08 00:15:27+0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> after your recent discussions about the test output and report I
> wondered if it would make sense to switch nolibc-test to KTAP output
> format [0].
> 
> With this it would be possible to have a wrapper script run each
> architecture test as its own test subcomponent.
> A (K)TAP parser/runner could then directly recognize and report failing
> testcases, making it easier to validate.
> 
> Also maybe we can hook it up into the regular kselftests setup and have
> the bots run it as part of that.
> 
> The kernel even includes a header-only library to implement the format [1].
> It also should be fairly easy to emit the format without a library.

Did you have a chance to look at this?

If you are not categorically opposed I would create a proof of concept
for further discussion.

> [0] Documentation/dev-tools/ktap.rst
> [1] Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst (Test harness)