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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 12:38:27 +0200 From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org> Cc: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, tj@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rafael@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org, andriin@...com, daniel@...earbox.net, atenart@...nel.org, alobakin@...me, weiwan@...gle.com, ap420073@...il.com, jeyu@...nel.org, ngupta@...are.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com, minchan@...nel.org, axboe@...nel.dk, mbenes@...e.com, jpoimboe@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, keescook@...omium.org, jikos@...nel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, peterz@...radead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] selftests: add tests_sysfs module On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 03:34:49PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > kunit relies on UML and UML is a simple one core architecture, to start > with. I thought the UML requirement was long gone, are you sure it is still present? > This means I cannot run tests for multicore with it, which is > where many races do happen! Yes, you can run kunit on other > architectures, but all that is new. What do you mean by "new"? It should work today, in today's kernel tree, right? > In this case kunit is not ideal given I want to mimic something in > userspace interaction, and expose races through error injection and > if we can use as many cores to busy races out. Can you not do that with kunit? If not, why not? thanks, greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists