netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests: net: give up on the cmsg

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: <87y0z92z8q.fsf@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 16:16:22 +0100
From: Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	<andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, <horms@...nel.org>, <shuah@...nel.org>,
	<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests: net: give up on the cmsg_time
 accuracy on slow machines

Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> writes:

> On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 13:49:23 +0100 Petr Machata wrote:
>> This logging and xfail handling duplicates lib.sh. Would a patch like
>> below be OK with you? The gist of it is to just use check_err, log_test
>> and xfail_on_slow from lib.sh to achieve what the test open-codes.
>
> Hm, maybe? I'm not going to say no if you send a patch, but IMHO
> if we were to change the output I think we should make it ktap.

Hmm, at some point, we'll want to convert lib.sh to ktap as well.
Hopefully transparently so that all the existing selftests out there
just magically become ktap-compatible.

If you want to preserve the output 1:1 then I feel like that's bending
over backwards too much. We could still maybe reuse xfail_on_slow and
ask for FAIL_TO_XFAIL, but that's marked internal in lib.sh. So I
retract my proposal. Too faffy at that point.