On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 12:35:07 -0800
Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > With a big notice that all pointers of unhashed, I don't think we need to
> > print it failed when we expect it to fail.
> >
> > If anything, skip the test and state:
> >
> > test_printf: hash test skipped because "make-printk-non-secret" is on the
> > command line.
>
> Yeah, I'm fine with "fail" or "skip". "pass" is mainly what I don't
> like. :)
Is there any printing of the tests being done? Looks to me that the tests
only print something if they fail. Thus "skip" and "pass" are basically the
same (if "skip" is simply not to do the test).
I mean, we could simply have:
static void __init
plain(void)
{
int err;
+ if (debug_never_hash_pointers)
+ return;
-- Steve
