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 320C5E77188 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:14:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 866123E5CEE for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 11:14:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (in-6.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.6]) (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 055B33E5701 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 11:14:35 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-6.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2; helo=smtp-out2.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2]) (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-6.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CCEE142BF86 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 11:14:35 +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 075511F38F; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:14:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1735812874; 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=N8xOAWEW0JsZdrK4ZBLRnSg8bOsQ2v49LjBC5l/lpVI=; b=EjVfL5TQU1zhyDp4Ugh18swzTuTtkpdhZQ8J8F5f2nMYg2fMuspjTrcMTbE6sWwijIRPU1 aXAdiC2vGILmmiMz6vpozTxKlnrLv9+q2aAg5+YMFY1Z4CbTxzxhlv/mJ2lQ1QwrLKM3We iufxHwWg0GXPgbsOFFVDsIIPGgnRwWA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1735812874; 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=N8xOAWEW0JsZdrK4ZBLRnSg8bOsQ2v49LjBC5l/lpVI=; b=PMLw2xHB33i1QwTA3rCuiQRrf5brBzQVXVwwOWzluxM991O6Pnu7+0+WkX7PXiBh8CRSLz uz55V8xSVQXaWSBg== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1735812874; 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=N8xOAWEW0JsZdrK4ZBLRnSg8bOsQ2v49LjBC5l/lpVI=; b=EjVfL5TQU1zhyDp4Ugh18swzTuTtkpdhZQ8J8F5f2nMYg2fMuspjTrcMTbE6sWwijIRPU1 aXAdiC2vGILmmiMz6vpozTxKlnrLv9+q2aAg5+YMFY1Z4CbTxzxhlv/mJ2lQ1QwrLKM3We iufxHwWg0GXPgbsOFFVDsIIPGgnRwWA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1735812874; 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=N8xOAWEW0JsZdrK4ZBLRnSg8bOsQ2v49LjBC5l/lpVI=; b=PMLw2xHB33i1QwTA3rCuiQRrf5brBzQVXVwwOWzluxM991O6Pnu7+0+WkX7PXiBh8CRSLz uz55V8xSVQXaWSBg== 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 C9A1213418; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:14:33 +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 VAMhMAlndmd+VgAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Thu, 02 Jan 2025 10:14:33 +0000 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2025 11:14:28 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Li Wang Message-ID: <20250102101428.GA72628@pevik> References: <20241231115607.56105-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20241231115607.56105-2-pvorel@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.50 / 50.00]; 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]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[] X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-6.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] lib: Add helpers for module signature enforcement 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: Po-Hsu Lin , "Ricardo B . Marliere" , 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 Li, > > +/** > > + * tst_check_module_signature_enforced() - Check if test needs to be > > skipped due > > + * enforced module signature. > > + * > > + * Skip test with tst_brk(TCONF) due module signature enforcement if > > + * module.sig_enforce=1 kernel parameter or CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE=y. > > + */ > > + > > +static inline void tst_check_module_signature_enforced(void) > This function is used to skip tests while detecting the signature > enforcement ON, but the name might be ambiguous somewhere. +1, I was not sure myself about naming. > I would suggest to name it: > tst_check_module_signature_not_enforced(void) or, > tst_skip_if_module_signature_enforced(void) or, > tst_requires_module_signature_disabled(void) Thanks for the suggestions. tst_requires_module_signature_disabled(void) looks best to me, we use "require" and "needs" for tst_brk(). I'll wait little longer before merging in case there is some feedback. Kind regards, Petr > Otherwise, the whole patch set looks good. > Reviewed-by: Li Wang -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp