linux-kernel - Re: Sporadic regmap unit test failure in raw

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: <f9aec946-a969-4f63-859b-4769ca392faa@roeck-us.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 08:30:30 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Sporadic regmap unit test failure in raw_sync

On 2/9/24 02:14, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 10:17:02PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 2/8/24 14:10, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
>>> I guess it's possible that we randomly generated the same value for the
>>> initial and modified values here?
> 
>> I think the diffs below should fix the problem. Would that do, or do you
>> have a better idea ?
> 
> Something like that, perhaps not that specific diff.  There's a bunch of
> tests that might be impacted as well so probably a helper would make

You are correct, though, unless I am missing something, those other cases
will result in wrongly passed tests, not wrongly failed tests. Not that
this is really better, but in a way it is less severe since that will also
only happen with the same low probability.

> sense here if nothing else, I should be able to take a look today or
> tomorrow.

Sounds good.

Thanks,
Guenter