linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: Add a test mangling with uc

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: <6c946ece-3663-4520-a90a-68be4d93c56d@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:56:57 +0530
From: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: shuah@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com, stsp2@...dex.ru, mingo@...nel.org,
 tglx@...utronix.de, mark.rutland@....com, ryan.roberts@....com,
 suzuki.poulose@....com, Anshuman.Khandual@....com,
 DeepakKumar.Mishra@....com, AneeshKumar.KizhakeVeetil@....com,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: Add a test mangling with uc_sigmask


On 6/7/24 19:12, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 06:53:27PM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
>> On 6/7/24 18:42, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 05:53:19PM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
>>>> + * Test describing a clear distinction between signal states - delivered and
>>>> + * blocked, and their relation with ucontext.
>>> This would be clearer if it said more positiviely what the relationship
>>> between these things is actually expected to be and how they're tested.
>>> Right now it's a bit hard to tell what the test is actually verifying.
>> I thought I had described that quite well in the code comments.
>> Anyways, I shall incorporate some detail into the initial test
>> description too.
> If the overview is confusing and people have to read the code to figure
> out what it means then that's an issue...


You are right.

I shall post a v2 rather quickly, perhaps in 1-2 days;

the SIGPIPE vs SIGSEGV mistake basically renders

this patch useless (although the test would still

pass), and makes the code unnecessarily hard

to review.