netdev - Re: [PATCH] selftests: Add _GNU_SOURCE definition when including kselftest

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]

Message-ID: <CAG4es9Xdo8fBEpZLWGFHodi7=+ZYLvrE-kQYt=YfCeEHWYxaXg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 10:57:47 -0700
From: Edward Liaw <edliaw@...gle.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Tao Su <tao1.su@...ux.intel.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org, 
	ivan.orlov0322@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org, perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.com, 
	shuah@...nel.org, seanjc@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, 
	bongsu.jeon@...sung.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, 
	pabeni@...hat.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, jarkko@...nel.org, 
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: Add _GNU_SOURCE definition when including kselftest_harness.h

On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 7:00 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 8 May 2024 10:55:05 +0800 Tao Su wrote:
> > Back to commit 38c957f07038, I don't see any advantage in using LINE_MAX.
> > Can we use a fixed value instead of LINE_MAX? E.g., 1024, 2048. Then we
> > just need to revert commit 809216233555.
>
> SGTM, FWIW. The print is printing a test summary line, printing more
> than 1k seems rather unreasonable. Other facilities, like TH_LOG(),
> should be used for displaying longer info.

I also submitted some patches to fix the _GNU_SOURCE issues here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20240507214254.2787305-1-edliaw@google.com/

I'm fine with this approach.  It's aligned to what Sean suggested
there, since it's causing a lot of troubles for the release cycle.