On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Denys Vlasenko <dvlas...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 06/10/2015 10:00 PM, Kees Cook wrote: >>> + printf("[SKIP]\tAT_SYSINFO not supplied, can't test\n"); >>> + exit(0); /* this is not a test failure */ >> >> Why is that not a test failure? It would mean it didn't actually test >> anything, which seems like a failure to me. > > Are you objecting to comment wording, or to exiting with 0? > > I exit with 0 because no bug was detected.
It seemed like a test failure to me: you're failing open ("couldn't configure test, I guess everything is okay") instead of failing closed ("couldn't configure test, something is terribly wrong"). If you can't locate how to make a syscall, then the test should fail, IMO, since it was not possible to perform the test, so you don't know if flags are being correctly handled across syscalls. -Kees -- Kees Cook Chrome OS Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/