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: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 20:46:22 +0100
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Laura Nao <laura.nao@...labora.com>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, 
	Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, 
	Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, 
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>, 
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, 
	kernel@...labora.com, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kselftest: Add basic test for probing the rust sample modules

On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 2:21 PM Laura Nao <laura.nao@...labora.com> wrote:
>
> Add new basic kselftest that checks if the available rust sample modules
> can be added and removed correctly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Laura Nao <laura.nao@...labora.com>

Thanks Laura!

Shuah: do you want that we pick this one? If so, your `Acked-by` would
be nice -- thanks! Otherwise, please feel free to pick it up.

Cc'ing David too since it involves KTAP in case he has comments.

> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rust/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/rust/Makefile

Missing SPDX line? (it can be added when picking it up, though).

> +$(OUTPUT)/ktap_helpers.sh:
> +       cp $(top_srcdir)/tools/testing/selftests/dt/ktap_helpers.sh $@

This may be something for another series, but should these helpers be
factored out perhaps / provided by the framework? Does it work
sourcing them from `dt` directly instead of copying meanwhile (to
simplify)?

> +KSFT_PASS=0
> +KSFT_FAIL=1
> +KSFT_SKIP=4

Similarly, would it make sense for this kind of "common constants" be
factored somehow? Or does that not make sense (I see other tests also
define them "manually")?

Cheers,
Miguel

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ