[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] kernel/signal: Signal-based pre-coredump notification
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 11:49:11AM -0700, Enke Chen wrote:
> Hi, Greg:
> On 10/15/18 11:43 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 11:16:36AM -0700, Enke Chen wrote:
> >> Hi, Greg:
> >>
> >>> Shouldn't there also be a manpage update, and a kselftest added for this
> >>> new user/kernel api that is being created?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I will submit a patch for manpage update once the code is accepted.
> >
> > Writing a manpage update is key to see if what you are describing
> > actually matches the code you have submitted. You should do both at the
> > same time so that they can be reviewed together.
> Ok, will do at the same time. But should I submit it as a separate patch?

Yes please.

> >> Regarding the kselftest, I am not sure. Once the prctl() is limited to
> >> self (which I will do), the logic would be pretty straightforward. Not
> >> sure if the selftest would add much value.
> >
> > If you do not have a test for this feature, how do you know it even
> > works at all? How will you know if it breaks in a future kernel
> > release? Have you tested this? If so, how?
> I have the test code. I am just not sure whether I should submit and check
> it in to the kselftest?

Of course you should, why wouldn't you? Do you want to be the only
person in the world responsible for ensuring that this feature does not
break for the next 20+ years? :)


greg k-h

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-15 20:59    [W:0.071 / U:0.204 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site