From: Garrett C. <yan...@gm...> - 2010-07-02 15:03:05
|
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Stephen Smalley <sd...@ty...> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 14:53 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: >> Quoting Stephen Smalley (sd...@ty...): >> > On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 22:36 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote: >> > > On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 10:52 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: >> > > > On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 17:43 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote: >> > > > > Hi Serge, >> > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 14:52 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: >> > > > > > Just a little note to announce that the selinux testsuite is now up as a >> > > > > > git tree at kernel.org. You can fetch it using >> > > > > > >> > > > > > git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/tests/selinux-testsuite >> > > > > >> > > > > Great. So, how far does it differ from that we have in LTP ? >> > > > > http://ltp.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=ltp/ltp-dev.git;a=tree;f=testcases/kernel/security/selinux-testsuite;h=066df4cdf2f8a80a0045e338b4bb2bf0f5d37091;hb=HEAD >> > > > > >> > > > > As you, Stephen and others in SELinux <se...@ty...> were the >> > > > > main contributors to the SELinux test(s) in LTP, i guess the next/future >> > > > > development for SELinux tests will be happening in the new tree. >> > > > > >> > > > > So, i would rather keep pulling to LTP from your tree. Now, could you >> > > > > please let me know: >> > > > > >> > > > > 1. Whether the new tree contains all scenarios which is present in >> > > > > LTP. In such a case a complete pruning of LTP SELinux tests can >> > > > > be done and replaced with your tree contents, >> > > > > 2. If some of the LTP tests are not there, then i would like to >> > > > > retain them in LTP side-by-side your tree contents, >> > > > >> > > > The new tree contains all of the selinux tests present in the LTP. You >> > > > cannot however simply replace the ltp version of the tests with this >> > > > tree, as this tree is a standalone testsuite and will not run within the >> > > > ltp test harness. This testsuite is based on the original standalone >> > > > selinux testsuite that was contributed by us to IBM to port to the LTP. >> > > > We have internally maintained this testsuite in parallel to the ltp >> > > > version as we have found it easier to set up, use, debug, and maintain. >> > > >> > > Thanks Stephen. Since you have maintained the Original-One Internally >> > > and have simultaneously contributed changes to the LTP-version of >> > > SELinux, i am depending on you/Serge/SELinux-Mailing-List-members to >> > > keep sending patches to LTP to update the LTP-version at regular >> > > intervals (off-course at your convenience ;-)) >> > >> > I think that will depend on whether there is some benefit to maintaining >> > the ltp version. We might derive some benefit if the ltp selinux >> > testsuite were better integrated (e.g. tests run by default if SELinux >> > is enabled on the host) and if the tests got some regular attention from >> > the ltp maintainers. Otherwise, it may be better to just remove the >> > tests from the ltp and point people to the standalone version. >> >> I don't object to the tests being maintained in LTP. But so far, AFAICS, >> the cost of maintaining in LTP far outweighs the benefits. >> >> So I'd like to know, does anyone (IBM?) *use* the version in LTP for >> automated testing? >> >> If not, heck we could replace ltp/testcases/kernel/security/selinux/* >> with a script that git clones the testsuite and runs it. >> >> Mind you it's not the selinux tests per se - it's the random bulk LTP >> updates which then break selinux tests, or worse, the autoconf cruft >> to try to detect whether the user wants selinux tests - which constitute >> the real maintenance cost. >> >> If someone who uses the LTP selinux tests could step up and offer >> to periodically run the tests and work with (me and) the community >> to push fixes, I'll be happy to help out. > > (cc'd Jeff Burke as I know he has run the ltp selinux tests in the past > on RHEL and has contributed patches in the past) > > Jeff - see above for context. Do you still run the ltp selinux tests on > a regular basis? Are you interested in helping to maintain them and > ideally to better integrate them into the LTP so that they will be run > by default (if SELinux is enabled) and exercised by the regular ltp > maintainers? Or are you just as happy to clone the separate standalone > selinux testsuite and run that as part of QA, separate from ltp testing? I'll do my best to assist as a resource too for you guys in the integration effort. Thanks, -Garrett |