[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5j+D-FP8Kt9unNOqKrQJP4DYTpmgkJxWykZyrYiVPz3Y3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 17:02:57 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
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 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?
> 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?
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
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.
