* Andy Lutomirski <l...@amacapital.net> wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > * Dmitry Safonov <dsafo...@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Should print on success:
> >> [root@localhost ~]# ./test_mremap_vdso_32
> >> AT_SYSINFO_EHDR is 0xf773f000
> >> [NOTE] Moving vDSO: [f773f000, f7740000] -> [a000000, a001000]
> >> [OK]
> >> Or segfault if landing was bad (before patches):
> >> [root@localhost ~]# ./test_mremap_vdso_32
> >> AT_SYSINFO_EHDR is 0xf774f000
> >> [NOTE] Moving vDSO: [f774f000, f7750000] -> [a000000, a001000]
> >> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
> >
> > So I still think that generating potential segfaults is not a proper way to
> > test a
> > new feature. How are we supposed to tell the feature still works? I realize
> > that
> > glibc is a problem here - but that doesn't really change the QA equation:
> > we are
> > adding new kernel code to help essentially a single application out of tens
> > of
> > thousands of applications.
> >
> > At minimum we should have a robust testcase ...
>
> I think it's robust enough. It will print "[OK]" and exit with 0 on
> success and it will crash on failure. The latter should cause make
> run_tests to fail reliably.
Indeed, you are right - I somehow mis-read it as potentially segfaulting on
fixed
kernels as well...
Will look at applying this after the merge window.
Thanks,
Ingo
