linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: firmware: Add details in error logging

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c4da142b-07c5-43a8-a12f-6e403d994a4e@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 14:29:29 -0600
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Harshal Wadhwa <embedkari167@...il.com>
Cc: shuah@...nel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: firmware: Add details in error logging

On 7/20/25 12:21, Harshal Wadhwa wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 03:39:47PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 7/14/25 15:26, Harshal wrote:
>>> Specify details in logs of failed cases
>>
>> How about changing the above to:
>>
>> Improve error messages adding details on failuires
> Will change this in next patch
> 
>>>    	fd = open(sys_path, O_WRONLY);
>>>    	if (fd < 0)
>>> -		die("open failed: %s\n",
>>> +		die("open of sys_path failed: %s\n",
>>
>> Why not just use sys_path as a input parameter to die()?
> Sure, that's great. Is there a way to test these changes ?

The same way you tested your v2 patch? How did you test this
patch?

thanks,
-- Shuah