linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 5/5] selftests/mm: add UFFDIO

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <345a414e-42df-4b2d-8425-2b605c46d2a9@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Dec 2023 10:02:26 +0100
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
        aarcange@...hat.com, lokeshgidra@...gle.com, peterx@...hat.com,
        ryan.roberts@....com, hughd@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com,
        axelrasmussen@...gle.com, rppt@...nel.org, willy@...radead.org,
        Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, jannh@...gle.com, zhangpeng362@...wei.com,
        bgeffon@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com, ngeoffray@...gle.com,
        jdduke@...gle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/5] selftests/mm: add UFFDIO_MOVE ioctl test

On 13.12.23 23:01, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 12/13/23 01:59, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> ...
>>> Another variation though, would be to run "make headers", and snapshot
>>> some of those files into tools/include.
>>
>> ^ this is what I had in mind
>>
>> If you're writing a test that needs some new fancy thing, update the relevant header.
>>
> 
> OK, and Mark Brown's nearby response [1] supports that, as well.
> 
> Thus fortified, I plan on doing the following steps:
> 
> Step 1: Do nothing about the revert patch that I sent earlier, thus
> allowing it to continue in its journey (so far, Andrew has moved it into
> mm-hotfixes-stable branch).
> 
> Step 2: Send out a patch for a modest part of selftests/mm, that uses
> this latest approach, and see how it fares in reviews.

All sounds good to me!

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb