From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3] userfaultfd: Minor fixes
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2026 12:42:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260330104237.GA82381@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <acpNKiCdqpKyhRo-@yuki.lan>
> Hi!
> > As a separate effort: Cyril raised a question if (as a separate effort) should
> > all test have some kconfig check (e.g. CONFIG_USERFAULTFD=y)
> > IMHO it's a question if we are ok with wide spread of needs_kconfig even if it's
> > not necessary (i.e. here SAFE_USERFAULTFD() check. In that case the benefit
> > would be 1) documentation of dependencies for testers in the test catalog 2)
> > check earlier that before running test code. And of course disadvantage to
> > really drag kconfig dependency, but we have accepted that already.
> > Ideally we'd decide on some policy (which may also includes .needs_drivers).
> > @all I planned to reword my original policy patch [1] to Li's suggestion +
> > Cyril's kconfig changes [2], but that still does not have "use kconfig to
> > document dependencies".
> I think that we can get rid of needs_drivers if we add more runtime
> checks.
> We have needs_drivers in:
> - kvm tests -> CONFIG_KVM + runtime check for kvm module
Maybe some of KVM might be more specific.
> - zram tests -> CONFIG_ZRAM + runtime check for zram module
> - squasfs tests -> CONFIG_SQUASHFS + runtime check for squashfs module
> - setxattr02 -> CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM + runtime check for brd module
> - ioctl08 -> has both filesystems and needs_drivers set to btrfs
> likely we do not need the needs_drivers there
> - ioctl_loop tests -> CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP + runtime check for loop module
> - madvise11 -> CONFIG_HWPOISON_INJECT + runtime check for hwpoison_inject module
> - quotactl tests -> CONFIG_QUOTA_V2 + runtime check for quota_v2 module
And quota_remount_test01.sh shell test.
> - uinput tests -> CONFIG_BLK_DEV_LOOP + CONFIG_TUN + CONFIG_INPUT_UINPUT
> - can tests -> CONFIG_CAN_VCAN + CONFIG_CAN_RAW + CONFIG_CAN_BCM
FYI a bit more, just few of them, but fortunately all for have config.
I'd be surprised if there was a kernel module without it.
testcases/cve/tcindex01.c dummy -> CONFIG_DUMMY
shell has more tests (fortunately already supports $TST_NEEDS_KCONFIGS):
tst_net.sh (if using nets) netns_lib.sh: veth -> CONFIG_VETH
binfmt_misc_lib.sh: binfmt_misc -> CONFIG_BINFMT_MISC + runtime check for binfmt_misc module
+ many more
> If we agree that we want to switch from needs_drivers to needs_kconfig +
> runtime checks I will add mappings from congfigs to module names into
> tst_kconfig and convert the tests..
+1
Kind regards,
Petr
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-30 10:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-27 16:01 [LTP] [PATCH v3] userfaultfd: Minor fixes Ricardo Branco
2026-03-30 7:24 ` Petr Vorel
2026-03-30 10:15 ` Cyril Hrubis
2026-03-30 10:42 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2026-03-30 7:58 ` Andrea Cervesato via ltp
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260330104237.GA82381@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=chrubis@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox