linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] lib: Add trivial kunit test for ratelimit

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: <c6738701-c86d-4f25-ac71-92602aa19984@paulmck-laptop>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2025 16:01:13 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
	Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
	John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
	Jon Pan-Doh <pandoh@...gle.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Karolina Stolarek <karolina.stolarek@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] lib: Add trivial kunit test for ratelimit

On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 06:46:29PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 15:41:52 -0700
> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed,  9 Jul 2025 11:03:33 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > Add a simple single-threaded smoke test for lib/ratelimit.c
> > > 
> > > To run on x86:
> > > 
> > > 	make ARCH=x86_64 mrproper
> > > 	./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --arch x86_64 --kconfig_add CONFIG_RATELIMIT_KUNIT_TEST=y --kconfig_add CONFIG_SMP=y lib_ratelimit
> > > 
> > > This will fail on old ___ratelimit(), and subsequent patches provide
> > > the fixes that are required.
> > > 
> > > [ paulmck:  Apply timeout and kunit feedback from Petr Mladek. ]  
> > 
> > The above line makes me suspect that this was paulmck tweaking someone
> > else's patch.  If the authorship correct on this one?
> 
> Looks to me that Paul just took some advice from Petr and was just giving
> credit. Perhaps he could lose the "paulmck:" part?

You got it!

> Perhaps:
> 
>   Suggested-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com> # for timeout and kunit feedback

That would work for me.

							Thanx, Paul