MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <17c5ebeb2e00879b0af1a9c32bf37ecdd9b9b31b.1515130397.git.luto@kernel.org>
References: <17c5ebeb2e00879b0af1a9c32bf37ecdd9b9b31b.1515130397.git.luto@kernel.org>
From: Shuah Khan <shuahkhan@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 14:25:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKocOOOqoh0RcsxSK21rXqhOUfz-h6A542fN4frSMW6c+EE2Vg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] selftests/x86: Add test_vsyscall
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
> This tests that the vsyscall entries do what they're expected to do.
> It also confirms that attempts to read the vsyscall page behave as
> expected.
>
> If changes are made to the vsyscall code or its memory map handling,
> running this test in all three of vsyscall=none, vsyscall=emulate,
> and vsyscall=native are helpful.
>
> (Because it's easy, this also compares the vsyscall results to their
>  vDSO equivalents.)
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
> ---
>

Hi Andy,

I am not cc'ed on this patch. Doesn't look like the patch is sent to everybody
get_maintainers lists for the set of files that are changed in this patch.

Please make sure to include everybody on your future kselftest patches.

thanks,
-- Shuah