Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/request_key03: new test for key instantiation races

[Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 11:59:35AM +0100, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
> Hi!
> > > You evaluate test twice: for add_key_pid and then for request_key_pid.
> > > This can lead to FAIL and PASS together. It's probably ok, it's just unusual for me.
> > > ./request_key03 
> > > tst_test.c:958: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s
> > > request_key03.c:136: FAIL: kernel oops while updating key of type 'encrypted'
> > > request_key03.c:144: PASS: didn't crash while requesting key of type 'encrypted'
> > > ...
> > > 
> > 
> > Would it be better if there was just one PASS, and it is only executed if
> > neither of the FAILs was reached?
> 
> Frankly I do not care that much in this case, the messages are pretty
> clear on what is happening.
> 
> The only thing I find a bit confusing is that we run the test twice for
> different CVEs and if one of them fails, both of them are marked as
> failed. It would be cleaner to pass optional parameter to the test for
> which CVE we are looking for and fail the test only if the operation we
> are interested in caused the oops. And, of course, fail on any if the
> test was executed without it. Otherwise I'm fine with the code as it is.
> 

Hmm, I guess I'll do that.  It's not perfect because if you have the fix for
"CVE-2017-15951" but not the fix for "CVE-2017-15299", the kernel log will still
be spammed with WARN_ON()s in both cases.  Well, that's what you get for having
unfixed bugs, I suppose...

Eric