linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] bitmap: Rename module

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: <2d1a2d58-d856-41c8-bc8f-c144bc7f2e81@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 06:53:18 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>,
 Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
 kees@...nel.org, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
 John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] bitmap: Rename module



On 7/30/24 12:51 AM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> On 7/29/24 7:09 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/29/24 1:07 AM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>>> On 7/27/24 10:35 PM, Yury Norov wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 04:06:57PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>>>>> Rename module to bitmap_kunit and rename the configuration option
>>>>> compliant with kunit framework.
>>>>
>>>> ... , so those enabling bitmaps testing in their configs by setting
>>>> "CONFIG_TEST_BITMAP=y" will suddenly get it broken, and will likely
>>>> not realize it until something nasty will happen.
>>> CONFIG_TEST_BITMAP was being enabled by the kselftest suite lib. The bitmap
>>> test and its config option would disappear. The same test can be run by
>>> just enabling KUNIT default config option:
>>>
>>> KUNIT_ALL_TESTS=y enables this bitmap config by default.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, NAK for config rename.
>>>>  
>>
>> I agree with Yury. Using KUNIT takes away test coverage for people who
>> are willing to run selftests but not use KUNIT.
> How is a kselftest useful when it doesn't even check results of the tests
> and report failures when they happen?

That should be an easy fix then.

-- 
~Randy