netdev - Re: [PATCH,net-next,0/2] Improve code coverage of syzkaller

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: <20170919.230853.540610280718334640.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Tue, 19 Sep 2017 23:08:53 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     peterpenkov96@...il.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH,net-next,0/2] Improve code coverage of syzkaller

From: Petar Penkov <peterpenkov96@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 21:26:14 -0700

> Furthermore, in a way testing already requires specific kernel
> configuration.  In this particular example, syzkaller prefers
> synchronous operation and therefore needs 4KSTACKS disabled. Other
> features that require rebuilding are KASAN and dbx. From this point
> of view, I still think that having the TUN_NAPI flag has value.

Then I think this path could be enabled/disabled with a runtime flag
just as easily, no?