netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 10/10] selftests: qdiscs: Add test coverage for ETS Qdisc

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: <85d0dmb5vc.fsf@mojatatu.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Nov 2019 16:22:15 -0500
From:   Roman Mashak <mrv@...atatu.com>
To:     Petr Machata <petrm@...lanox.com>
Cc:     "netdev\@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 10/10] selftests: qdiscs: Add test coverage for ETS Qdisc

Petr Machata <petrm@...lanox.com> writes:

> Roman Mashak <mrv@...atatu.com> writes:
>
>> Petr Machata <petrm@...lanox.com> writes:
>>
>>> Add TDC coverage for the new ETS Qdisc.
>>>
>>
>> It would be good to have tests for upper bound limits of qdisc
>> parameters.
>
> All right. I can think of "bands 16", and then "quantum $(((1 << 32) -
> 1))", but I'm not sure the latter is very useful. Did you have anything
> else in mind?

I think, any test that would validate the user's input of parameters
would suffice, e.g. min/max acceptable values, range of values and
such.