netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1 V3] selftests: net: improve missing modules error message

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]

Message-ID: <20240827140610.0ec927df@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 14:06:10 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: David Hunter <david.hunter.linux@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
 javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
 shuah@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1 V3] selftests: net: improve missing modules error
 message

On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 16:56:29 -0400 David Hunter wrote:
> The error message describing the required modules is inaccurate.
> Currently, only  "SKIP: Need act_mirred module" is printed when any of
> the modules are missing. As a result, users might only include that
> module; however, three modules are required.
> 
> Fix the error message to show any/all modules needed for the script file
> to properly execute.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Hunter <david.hunter.linux@...il.com>

Please don't post patches in reply to:

Quoting documentation:

  Resending after review
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  Allow at least 24 hours to pass between postings. This will ensure reviewers
  from all geographical locations have a chance to chime in. Do not wait
  too long (weeks) between postings either as it will make it harder for reviewers
  to recall all the context.

  Make sure you address all the feedback in your new posting. Do not post a new
  version of the code if the discussion about the previous version is still
  ongoing, unless directly instructed by a reviewer.

  The new version of patches should be posted as a separate thread,
  not as a reply to the previous posting. Change log should include a link
  to the previous posting (see :ref:`Changes requested`).

See: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#resending-after-review

Our patch queue is too long right now for me to handle incorrectly
posted patches, sorry, please repost tomorrow (v4 or v3 REPOST).
-- 
pw-bot: cr