On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 03:18:15PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Since we now have knobs to twiddle what used to be set on kernel > > configurations we can build one base kernel configuration and modify > > behaviour to mimic such kernel configurations to test them. > > > > Provided you build a kernel with: > > > > CONFIG_TEST_FIRMWARE=y > > CONFIG_FW_LOADER=y > > CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER=y > > CONFIG_IKCONFIG=y > > CONFIG_IKCONFIG_PROC=y > > > > We should now be able test all possible kernel configurations > > when FW_LOADER=y. Note that when FW_LOADER=m we just don't provide > > the built-in functionality of the built-in firmware. > > > > If you're on an old kernel and either don't have /proc/config.gz > > (CONFIG_IKCONFIG_PROC) or haven't enabled CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER > > we cannot run these dynamic tests, so just run both scripts just > > as we used to before making blunt assumptions about your setup > > and requirements exactly as we did before. > > > > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cool. Nice to have it all in one test build now. :) Now what about we start discussing one kernel config only for the future? The impact would be the size of the fallback mechanism. That should be a bit clear in terms of size impact after this series. Wonder what Josh thinks as he help with tinyconfig. We could target v4.18 if its sensible. > Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Luis
