On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:15:58 +0200
Denys Vlasenko 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
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Denys Vlasenko 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
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> The test is fairly simplistic: it checks that all registers
> are preserved across 32-bit syscall via VDSO.
>
> Run-tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko
> CC: Linus Torvalds
> CC: Steven Rostedt
> CC: Ingo Molnar
> CC: Borislav
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com wrote:
The test is fairly simplistic: it checks that all registers
are preserved across 32-bit syscall via VDSO.
Run-tested.
Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko dvlas...@redhat.com
CC: Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org
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
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:15:58 +0200
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
6 matches
Mail list logo