[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202504301153.E2D0C4ED@keescook>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 11:53:57 -0700
From: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/32] kselftest harness and nolibc compatibility
On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 02:06:34PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 4/22/25 02:51, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 10:48:28AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 11:00:24AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > > Nolibc is useful for selftests as the test programs can be very small,
> > > > and compiled with just a kernel crosscompiler, without userspace support.
> > > > Currently nolibc is only usable with kselftest.h, not the more
> > > > convenient to use kselftest_harness.h
> > > > This series provides this compatibility by adding new features to nolibc
> > > > and removing the usage of problematic features from the harness.
> > > >
> > > > The first half of the series are changes to the harness, the second one
> > > > are for nolibc. Both parts are very independent and should go through
> > > > different trees.
> > >
> > > I need a few nolibc bits of this series (snprintf() and prep patches) to base
> > > further patches on. For that I'd like to pick up all the nolibc patches from
> > > this series through the nolibc tree. They got Acks from Willy.
> > >
> > > Any objections?
> >
> > No objection on my side!
> >
>
> Thanks.
>
> Kees, do you have any comments on this series? If you are okay
> with it, I would like to apply this for next.
Fine by me! :)
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists