netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: guarantee that useep() calls nanosleep() syscall

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: <CAADnVQL4++s-_z_DG-1VqxWPFVzfdS8_r3=RLPwiF5XevSncgA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Mar 2020 18:16:11 -0700
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
Cc:     bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>, Julia Kartseva <hex@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: guarantee that useep() calls
 nanosleep() syscall

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 11:54 AM Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com> wrote:
>
> Some implementations of C runtime library won't call nanosleep() syscall from
> usleep(). But a bunch of kprobe/tracepoint selftests rely on nanosleep being
> called to trigger them. To make this more reliable, "override" usleep
> implementation and call nanosleep explicitly.
>
> Cc: Julia Kartseva <hex@...com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>

Applied. Thanks