linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10] lib: checksum: Use aligned accesses for ip_fast_csum and csum_ipv6

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: <015563c8-8075-4a7e-bf33-74333aaca648@roeck-us.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 12:22:29 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@...osinc.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
 Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
 "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
 "James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
 Parisc List <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com>,
 Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
 "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
 KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10] lib: checksum: Use aligned accesses for ip_fast_csum
 and csum_ipv6_magic tests

On 2/29/24 11:38, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
[ ... ]
>> Tough one. I can't enable CONFIG_NET_TEST on nios2, parisc, and arm with THUMB
>> enabled due to crashes or hangs in gso tests. I accept that. Downside is that I
>> have to disable CONFIG_NET_TEST on those architectures/platforms entirely,
>> meaning a whole class of tests are missing for those architectures. I would
>> prefer to have a configuration option such as CONFIG_NET_GSO_TEST to let me
>> disable the problematic tests for the affected platforms so I can run all
>> the other network unit tests. Yes, obviously something is wrong either with
>> the affected tests or with the implementation of the tested functionality
>> on the affected systems, but that could be handled separately if a separate
>> configuration option existed, and new regressions in other tests on the affected
>> architectures could be identified as they happen.
> 
> I think I got confused here, is this an issue with the tests included in
> this patch or is it unrelated?
> 

Unrelated. It was intended to be an example of another set of tests which
suffer from a similar problem (crash on certain architectures if enabled).
Sorry for the confusion.

Guenter