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]
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 17:30:30 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
 pabeni@...hat.com, alexander.duyck@...il.com, fw@...len.de, Willem de
 Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] add skb_segment kunit coverage

On Thu,  5 Oct 2023 09:48:54 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> As discussed at netconf last week. Some kernel code is exercised in
> many different ways. skb_segment is a prime example. This ~350 line
> function has 49 different patches in git blame with 28 different
> authors.
> 
> When making a change, e.g., to fix a bug in one specific use case,
> it is hard to establish through analysis alone that the change does
> not break the many other paths through the code. It is impractical to
> exercise all code paths through regression testing from userspace.
> 
> Add the minimal infrastructure needed to add KUnit tests to networking,
> and add code coverage for this function.

Apparently we're supposed add descriptions to all modules now:

WARNING: modpost: missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() in net/core/gso_test.o

Powered by blists - more mailing lists