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 Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30D35D711CB for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:08:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAAFC3D923C for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:08:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (in-5.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 505173D922B for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:07:48 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-5.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=195.135.223.131; helo=smtp-out2.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.223.131]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E43D7BD0C8 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:07:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0D421F7C4; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:07:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1732122466; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3eSQYYNcxObBB6KIHTthPx1YrX+ASykBYPNaSLP69Eo=; b=A3uBWMKvZUxvlBwsaj4R1KJP5LaGQEfpHoX9hC9Qm3QY6KSGzlShJVWTBxjgbHOdJirGmM DkV+7P2Gmlj9+Pp7vwgDPwSHAIG6QJsZU8NuzJGiqsjhYHEC/FuNYJdRrjC+uwRnrqdtFH P9i5NiGRJYzbv4asAd1RY+IOlYeQ6t8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1732122466; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3eSQYYNcxObBB6KIHTthPx1YrX+ASykBYPNaSLP69Eo=; b=Vjt/OkXVikTA/xoTpbxfWuYq3Z4GTaTWhvljyOzxOiw0LjnJx948XNmZsdOO2hYlCn9RYh IIfDzLPy/ERfDICw== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1732122464; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3eSQYYNcxObBB6KIHTthPx1YrX+ASykBYPNaSLP69Eo=; b=MFnolcq5VEleKrBlTdRVDwgeDJ6xTBQhUguk3guUUVK9e8u1G/pIeObJkmHCpLZfFzZvTE YrTRz4VVBP0gs+KksBjUWb4TMqe51aW7e4RBMkmbM3GWuwNBR1U33Es5vhJ8WUm9eUveAF vlYZK9X86eUQhUTZEqwHHkEemfVJBzo= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1732122464; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3eSQYYNcxObBB6KIHTthPx1YrX+ASykBYPNaSLP69Eo=; b=UKMFm9j3D+2G+fOYuW5tE6xRPr2wym0MrRzL+pNik1m155Yw0Sf3sQdjSogShOnMu3CsIv ugNfU+1Zx7mPeSCw== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8DB513297; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:07:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id oHRPN18XPmeFYgAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:07:43 +0000 Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:07:38 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Jan Stancek Message-ID: <20241120170738.GA38310@pevik> References: <7cdc48ed109ee67af12d0bc74eb32c0b7f862430.1732031092.git.jstancek@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-7.50 / 50.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[99.99%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo,suse.cz:replyto,suse.cz:email]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[] X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-5.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/pkeys01: use a dummy function instead of function_size X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi Jan, ... > > This could be an alternative to reverting PKEY_DISABLE_EXECUTE test. > > I haven't tested it yet on 32bit, but since it doesn't rely on any > > instruction codes I don't expect it to break. An important test > > would also be ppc64le. Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel LGTM. NOTE: we have hackweek this week, I guess you get Martin's feedback next week. > I tested 32bit and ppc64le, both worked fine, so I propose we give this > a consideration as alternative to Martin's revert. Thanks! Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp