linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] bug/kunit: Core support for suppressing warning backtraces

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: <20250602075707.GI21197@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2025 09:57:07 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Cc: Alessandro Carminati <acarmina@...hat.com>,
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
	Daniel Diaz <daniel.diaz@...aro.org>,
	David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
	Arthur Grillo <arthurgrillo@...eup.net>,
	Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>,
	Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
	Ville Syrjala <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Alessandro Carminati <alessandro.carminati@...il.com>,
	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>,
	Jeff Johnson <jeff.johnson@....qualcomm.com>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] bug/kunit: Core support for suppressing warning
 backtraces

On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 06:51:50AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:

> It's not for you, then. :) I can't operate ftrace, but I use kunit
> almost daily. Ignoring WARNs makes this much nicer, and especially for
> CIs.

I'm thinking you are more than capable of ignoring WARNs too. This
leaves the CI thing.

So all this is really about telling CIs which WARNs are to be ignored,
and which are not? Surely the easiest way to achieve that is by
printing more/better identifying information instead of suppressing
things?