netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests/net: mctp: Roundtrip tun tests

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:   Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:25:29 +0800
From:   Matt Johnston <matt@...econstruct.com.au>
To:     Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jeremy Kerr <jk@...econstruct.com.au>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests/net: mctp: Roundtrip tun tests

Hi Shuah,

Thanks for the review.

On Tue, 2022-03-22 at 17:28 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> Are you adding this test to main Makefile? If so you will need to chane
> selftests/Makefile

Given most test-running systems won't have the "mctp" binary requirement I'm
not sure it should be added to the main Makefile? The tests are intended more
for future MCTP developers. I can add it if you think it's worthwhile though.

> Change the message to "AF_MCTP support is required to run this test. Skipping"
> 
> I assume this servers as a check for CONFIG_TUN and CONFIG_MCTP?
> ...
> Couple of thoughts. If you were to write wrapper shell script,
> you could check for requirements: configs, mctp presence from
> the shell script and then run mctp-tun from the shell scripts.
> This is a just a suggestion if adding shell script makes things
> easier especially checking the configs.

I think it's better kept in the compiled mctp-tun - it's often used cross-
compiled so a single binary is simpler to manage. I'll move the requirements
checks out to a separate function for clarity.

Cheers,
Matt