Re: [PATCH net-next v1 7/7] bpf: Always test unprivileged programs

[MickaÃl SalaÃn]

On 06/02/2017 17:09, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On 2/5/17 3:14 PM, MickaÃl SalaÃn wrote:
>> -        if (unpriv && test->prog_type)
>> -            continue;
>> +        if (!test->prog_type) {
>> +            if (!unpriv)
>> +                set_admin(false);
>> +            printf("#%d/u %s ", i, test->descr);
>> +            do_test_single(test, true, &passes, &errors);
>> +            if (!unpriv)
>> +                set_admin(true);
>> +        }
>>
>> -        printf("#%d %s ", i, test->descr);
>> -        do_test_single(test, unpriv, &passes, &errors);
>> +        if (!unpriv) {
>> +            printf("#%d/p %s ", i, test->descr);
>> +            do_test_single(test, false, &passes, &errors);
>> +        }
> 
> great idea.
> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> as far as other patches.. we need to figure out how to avoid conflicts
> between net-next and Arnaldo's tree where Joe's patches went.

A merge between this series and Arnaldo's tree works fine. The only
dependency is between patches 6 and 7.

> 
> Mickael,
> can you see some way of splitting the patch set between trees?
> Like above test_verfier.c improvement needs to go into net-next.
> The rest can go via perf
> 
> 

OK, I'll send a first series with the patches from 1 to 5 for the perf
tree and a second series with the 6th and 7th patches (touching
tools/testing/selftests/bpf only) to net-next.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature