|To:||Kevin Cernekee <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Subject:||Re: [PATCH 1/4] MIPS: Replace _PAGE_READ with _PAGE_NO_READ|
|From:||David Daney <email@example.com>|
|Date:||Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:52:24 -0700|
|Cc:||Ralf Baechle <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org|
|References:||<7aa38c32b7748a95e814e5bb0583f967@localhost> <4DAC75C6.email@example.com> <BANLkTinbFNvez+G4LpmF7uwwJrH_J1NK8w@mail.gmail.com>|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:188.8.131.52) Gecko/20101027 Fedora/3.0.10-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.10|
On 04/18/2011 11:24 AM, Kevin Cernekee wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:32 AM, David Daney<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:How much testing have you done on non-RI/XI CPUs?On a non-RIXI CPU I was able to boot the system, run a basic GUI application, create R/W shared mappings to /dev/mem, insert/remove kernel modules, run a broken program that dumps core, etc. I guess it would be a good idea to make sure swap still works. Didn't try that yet. Can you think of anything else that might exercise the bits that were touched by the patch? Were there any tests you ran during the development of RIXI support which uncovered subtle issues?
We run the LTP, I think it tests these things. We also have a small test case that tests for both the no-read and no-execute parts, but that would be expected to fail on platforms that don't have RI/XI bits.
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||[PATCH v2] MIPS: Introduce set_elf_platform() helper function, Kevin Cernekee|
|Next by Date:||Realtek's LX 5181 vs LX 5280, Markus Gothe|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: [PATCH 1/4] MIPS: Replace _PAGE_READ with _PAGE_NO_READ, Kevin Cernekee|
|Next by Thread:||[PATCH 1/3] MIPS: Introduce set_elf_platform() helper function, Kevin Cernekee|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|