[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 23:51:35 +0200
From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
David Drysdale
<drysdale@...gle.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>, Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an
assert step mechanism
On 19/04/2017 02:02, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net> wrote:
>> This is useful to return an information about the error without being
>> able to write to TH_LOG_STREAM.
>>
>> Helpers from test_harness.h may be useful outside of the seccomp
>> directory.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
>> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
>> ---
>> tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h | 8 +++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h
>> index a786c69c7584..77e407663e06 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h
>> @@ -397,7 +397,7 @@ struct __test_metadata {
>> const char *name;
>> void (*fn)(struct __test_metadata *);
>> int termsig;
>> - int passed;
>> + __s8 passed;
>
> Why the reduction here? int is signed too?
Because the return code of a process is capped to 8 bits and I use a
negative value to not mess with the current interpretation of 0 (error)
and 1 (OK) for the "passed" variable.
>
>> int trigger; /* extra handler after the evaluation */
>> struct __test_metadata *prev, *next;
>> };
>> @@ -476,6 +476,12 @@ void __run_test(struct __test_metadata *t)
>> "instead of by signal (code: %d)\n",
>> t->name,
>> WEXITSTATUS(status));
>> + } else if (t->passed < 0) {
>> + fprintf(TH_LOG_STREAM,
>> + "%s: Failed at step #%d\n",
>> + t->name,
>> + t->passed * -1);
>> + t->passed = 0;
>> }
>
> Instead of creating an overloaded mechanism here, perhaps have an
> option reporting mechanism that can be enabled. Like adding to
> __test_metadata "bool no_stream; int test_number;" and adding
> test_number++ to each ASSERT/EXCEPT call, and doing something like:
>
> if (t->no_stream) {
> fprintf(TH_LOG_STREAM,
> "%s: Failed at step #%d\n",
> t->name,
> t->test_number);
> }
>
> It'd be a cleaner approach, maybe?
Good idea, we will then be able to use 255 steps!
Do you want me to send this as a separate patch?
Can we move test_harness.h outside of the seccomp directory to be
available to other subsystems as well?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
