linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 6/6] scanf: further break kunit into test cases

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: <CAJ-ks9nFV-jh5wiBFzabXaE_nx13s+4R4wVZ+uqP7zm0-KGfAw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 09:27:37 -0400
From: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Cc: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, 
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>, 
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, 
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 6/6] scanf: further break kunit into test cases

On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 9:21 AM Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for trying this. But I personally do not find this as a big win.
> It causes that the test log is longer than one screen and thus harder
> to review.
>
> It might be fine when running only this test and running it only once.
> But I think that it is quite common to run more tests and then
> it is easy to get lost.
>
> I guess that there are tools for handling the KTAP format which might
> make this easier but...
>
> So, I would prefer to avoid this patch.
>
> Best Regards,
> Petr

Fine with me, and thanks for having a look! I've rebased this on Kees'
for-next/move-kunit-tests, shall I send v10 with this patch dropped?