linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests: ublk: fix behavior when fio is not installed

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: <aMoCYseJUVcbC7gl@dev-ushankar.dev.purestorage.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 18:35:46 -0600
From: Uday Shankar <ushankar@...estorage.com>
To: Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@...estorage.com>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: ublk: fix behavior when fio is not installed

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 04:11:53PM -0600, Uday Shankar wrote:
> Some ublk selftests have strange behavior when fio is not installed.
> While most tests behave correctly (run if they don't need fio, or skip
> if they need fio), the following tests have different behavior:
> 
> - test_null_01 and test_null_02 try to run fio without checking if it
>   exists first, and fail on any failure of the fio command (including
>   "fio command not found"). So these tests fail when they should skip.
> - test_stress_05 runs fio without checking if it exists first, but
>   doesn't fail on fio command failure. This test passes, but that pass
>   is misleading as the test doesn't do anything useful without fio
>   installed. So this test passes when it should skip.
> 
> Fix these issues by adding _have_program fio checks to the top of all
> three of these tests.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Uday Shankar <ushankar@...estorage.com>

Please disregard; it was pointed out to me that I missed a few tests.
Will post an updated v2 soon.