From 331b2cfb31037501f2036db0243f55540bab62d6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Horstmann Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:17:25 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Clarify design decision in light of actions We were successful in adding transparent memory-poisoning testing, so simplify to the real design decision we made. Signed-off-by: David Horstmann --- docs/architecture/psa-shared-memory.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/docs/architecture/psa-shared-memory.md b/docs/architecture/psa-shared-memory.md index 611aedc341..a906c812c4 100644 --- a/docs/architecture/psa-shared-memory.md +++ b/docs/architecture/psa-shared-memory.md @@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ It may be possible to transparently implement memory poisoning so that existing These issues may be solved by creating some kind of test wrapper around every PSA function call that poisons the memory. However, it is unclear how straightforward this will be in practice. If this is simple to achieve, the extra coverage and time saved on new tests will be a benefit. If not, writing new tests is the best strategy. -**Design decision: Attempt to add memory poisoning transparently to existing tests. If this proves difficult, write new tests instead.** +**Design decision: Add memory poisoning transparently to existing tests.** #### Discussion of copying validation