From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5CE2C433E0 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 19:11:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4346206B7 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 19:11:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="Q7SusNor" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728665AbgFSTLT (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:11:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38076 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726065AbgFSTLS (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:11:18 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x642.google.com (mail-pl1-x642.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::642]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD9D3C06174E for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:11:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x642.google.com with SMTP id j4so4284337plk.3 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:11:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=VScT64RtDzbmtFTIPPkA4G9jZecLisLc5YoK422OgPY=; b=Q7SusNor1JfS/KxsOYlgqfU+dHe6cO5vzSZYYuf4g9fxPcu7RJC+J6bbzyZEKjfvoh HgqGPKMMErEwR99taI9kg5v+zpP88fIYK8c8XyHCjBPOTgV1GGs1NRKusApUtSenOltS 8Q9aS8qZr4oVmmRHMB/fNc6dHY5KYijpLqjDo= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=VScT64RtDzbmtFTIPPkA4G9jZecLisLc5YoK422OgPY=; b=Ko/+Q9oboqPWUwXlDcdG4pI/5gTZt3vYkgrKpHX2mecbOUv2GrxRMergY/hnNq8Na0 zpK29FcwLKuVKOy5OQj42x5URRky6YH7v55MDoDqbCGHd64+rRaQWl38rm4wTwt9JY// r7PP9CfUmoIIyBT5CDcwEWM84xYF35+LyDmlhYaqTU6SKlilAd4jLZlVKodKI7diHKGL jn7Yk3qPZzTE9dhqkHnMjTiJpQOqb/IF0LtkQknyA/2STz3uwC2Ws8YnBQRdFB1rZ7TG xPqEtWATTLRY5S8pGvMkRhTt5wcjuHhZkgDo9T4HBGQLCkgt7m9gkPghUkYvzUc2b1Vt AxuQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530egETqEdA99s53PyFY0n3km8ViPQoafxas1HMdAlom4QkoRpMP COz5AikelFqV6VdtOkLrHHwZtw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx6PQHraOqgQ+KQVtVVOrs8OFQ3RHzYra6b4IA1L3O9ughAGqU2dHrt1zJCUXnaZwQrOdPRyQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:6808:: with SMTP id p8mr4378913pjj.81.1592593877289; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:11:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v66sm6696796pfb.63.2020.06.19.12.11.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:11:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:11:15 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Frank Rowand Cc: Brendan Higgins , "Bird, Tim" , Paolo Bonzini , "shuah@kernel.org" , "linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , David Gow Subject: Re: RFC - kernel selftest result documentation (KTAP) Message-ID: <202006191208.BF995C82F5@keescook> References: <202006141120.96FF8C5@keescook> <7161fadb-45ba-c4c0-8bbb-cb47d2dd0265@redhat.com> <202006161653.15C278A5@keescook> <398200b2-f8bc-894d-6d6f-366ff98a490e@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <398200b2-f8bc-894d-6d6f-366ff98a490e@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kselftest-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 01:47:29PM -0500, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 2020-06-16 18:58, Kees Cook wrote: > > I proposed fixing that recently[1]. seccomp uses XFAIL for "I have > > detected you lack the config to test this, so I can't say it's working > > or not, because it only looks like a failure without the config." > > Based on that description, the case sounds like it should be a skip. hrm hrm. Yeah. Thinking more about this, I agree. I think it came about this way because the kselftest_harness.h API (not TAP output) is different from the kselftest.h API (TAP output), and so the tests were written with what was available in kselftest_harness.h which has no "SKIP" idea. The series linked was mostly built to bring kselftest_harness.h into the TAP output universe, so the XFAIL -> SKIP mapping needs to be included as well. > Or if the entire test depends on the missing config then Bail out might > be appropriate. > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200611224028.3275174-7-keescook@chromium.org/ I will rework this series. -- Kees Cook