netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix spurious failures in accept due to EAGAIN

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]

Date:   Fri, 13 Mar 2020 19:48:55 -0700
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
Cc:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-team@...udflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix spurious failures in accept
 due to EAGAIN

On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 05:42:36PM +0100, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
> 
> What if we extended test_progs runner to support process-per-test
> execution model? Perhaps as an opt-in for selected tests.

I would love that.
Especially if fork-per-test can make majority of the tests to execute in
parallel. Running test_progs is the biggest time sync for me when I apply
patches. Running them in parallel will help me apply patches faster, so I can
dedicate more time to reviews :)