From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4197E215F53; Mon, 7 Apr 2025 17:22:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744046571; cv=none; b=g8pKd3TgWedCyPM7uSsduZd7ZkLy4mHsGpnjuYhoyRHdPiyL7aAY02fmJ++px0btFl2+TXl8CP73Tv2CeDkPDyAI9crPzWl2ImhROc2/a8jv4q3ey6Tp5bpC19Ak2opBfN7yPyowR5OMshWnjrimuRxuJc7uqwYvAxqQNukIJKQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744046571; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5MiA6rW4LfxN1OJrXvJOkPhxtGriKKOrwlj6xmWs6gU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=AyTlgXvPoR3t6nFwjXhsJMjE+ICqttNXb2UdWJMjlV+xaQ90BOMo9e3p8RyjbUG1BpPd/9vYjvydRm/xn+g6rDT/lAllTpzHhm08Pn0VHHaTKoyYSyjNXCXBUWmxarHHJgxCvfkDihr//aGHmgKCdEbUs+G79AsmTj/SPXeYN00= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=p3IToI36; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="p3IToI36" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 85618C4CEDD; Mon, 7 Apr 2025 17:22:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1744046570; bh=5MiA6rW4LfxN1OJrXvJOkPhxtGriKKOrwlj6xmWs6gU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=p3IToI369m7NSrOWL13oQG3F6/buyI3A4dh4ALpCjHsdBGiSEHnKb+hnUcoDx3yyF cqkGLmpXGhDCy2tRwvyFBYDejwApUfsrYU2yRo8mZ3lzbplmWl0YPZNKKJQG9RsVjr UZ52ClNXrC8Oy4FcPYc07S3S57xrrOgPlPvxePPAWnggAlLNVw1ADcuJkYquMk5qxN G74smJ/yS1YDRV2MQpj3rDO0l2AAjdVcQZa4k41UIHoQ5QFQPJeIjr6pr+x9ljHagK FQ9JrA6wrvG4AsbLHqYcAjiUW6cXA1jJ881q2LQI2eHYmIUMcWTNpCudaZVu/fpq58 LjvTK5fIpngLQ== Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2025 10:22:49 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Anand Jain Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, zlang@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/6] fstests: common/sysfs: add new file sysfs and helpers Message-ID: <20250407172249.GA6274@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 11:48:18AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > Introduce `verify_sysfs_syntax()` and `_require_fs_sysfs_attr_policy()` > to verify whether a sysfs attribute rejects invalid input arguments > during writes. > > Signed-off-by: Anand Jain > --- > common/sysfs | 141 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 141 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 common/sysfs > > diff --git a/common/sysfs b/common/sysfs > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..9f2d77c6b1f5 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/common/sysfs > @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ > +##/bin/bash > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > +# Copyright (c) 2025 Oracle. All Rights Reserved. > +# > +# Common/sysfs file for the sysfs related helper functions. > + > +# Test for the existence of a policy at /sys/fs/$FSTYP/$DEV/$ATTR > +# > +# All arguments are necessary, and in this order: > +# - dev: device name, e.g. $SCRATCH_DEV > +# - attr: path name under /sys/fs/$FSTYP/$dev > +# - policy: policy within /sys/fs/$FSTYP/$dev > +# > +# Usage example: > +# _has_fs_sysfs_attr_policy /dev/mapper/scratch-dev read_policy round-robin > +_has_fs_sysfs_attr_policy() > +{ > + local dev=$1 > + local attr=$2 > + local policy=$3 > + > + if [ ! -b "$dev" -o -z "$attr" -o -z "$policy" ]; then > + _fail \ > + "Usage: _has_fs_sysfs_attr_policy " > + fi Shouldn't this return 1 if the parameters are not fully specified? > + > + local dname=$(_fs_sysfs_dname $dev) > + test -e /sys/fs/${FSTYP}/${dname}/${attr} What is the point of testing path existence here if the function doesn't actually change its behavior? > + > + cat /sys/fs/${FSTYP}/${dname}/${attr} | grep -q ${policy} > +} > + > +# Require the existence of a sysfs entry at /sys/fs/$FSTYP/$DEV/$ATTR > +# and value in it contains $policy > +# All arguments are necessary, and in this order: > +# - dev: device name, e.g. $SCRATCH_DEV > +# - attr: path name under /sys/fs/$FSTYP/$dev > +# - policy: mentioned in /sys/fs/$FSTYP/$dev/$attr > +# > +# Usage example: > +# _require_fs_sysfs_attr_policy /dev/mapper/scratch-dev read_policy round-robin > +_require_fs_sysfs_attr_policy() > +{ > + _has_fs_sysfs_attr_policy "$@" && return > + > + local dev=$1 > + local attr=$2 > + local policy=$3 > + local dname=$(_fs_sysfs_dname $dev) > + > + _notrun "This test requires /sys/fs/${FSTYP}/${dname}/${attr} ${policy}" > +} > + > +_set_sysfs_policy() > +{ > + local dev=$1 > + local attr=$2 > + shift > + shift > + local policy=$@ > + > + _set_fs_sysfs_attr $dev $attr ${policy} > + > + case "$FSTYP" in > + btrfs) > + _get_fs_sysfs_attr $dev $attr | grep -q "[${policy}]" > + if [[ $? != 0 ]]; then > + echo "Setting sysfs $attr $policy failed" > + fi > + ;; > + *) > + _fail \ > +"sysfs syntax verification for '${attr}' '${policy}' for '${FSTYP}' is not implemented" > + ;; > + esac > +} > + > +_set_sysfs_policy_must_fail() > +{ > + local dev=$1 > + local attr=$2 > + shift > + shift > + local policy=$@ > + > + _set_fs_sysfs_attr $dev $attr ${policy} | _filter_sysfs_error \ > + | tee -a $seqres.full > +} > + > +# Verify sysfs attribute rejects invalid input. > +# Usage syntax: > +# _verify_sysfs_syntax <$dev> <$attr> <$policy> [$value] > +# Examples: > +# _verify_sysfs_syntax $TEST_DEV read_policy pid > +# _verify_sysfs_syntax $TEST_DEV read_policy round-robin 4k > +# Note: > +# Process must call . ./common/filter > +_verify_sysfs_syntax() > +{ > + local dev=$1 > + local attr=$2 > + local policy=$3 > + local value=$4 > + > + # Do this in the test case so that we know its prerequisites. > + # '_require_fs_sysfs_attr_policy $TEST_DEV $attr $policy' But it's commented out ... ? --D > + > + # Test policy specified wrongly. Must fail. > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'$policy $policy'" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'$policy t'" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "' '" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'${policy} n'" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'n ${policy}'" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "' ${policy}'" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "' ${policy} '" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'${policy} '" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr _${policy} > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr ${policy}_ > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr _${policy}_ > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr ${policy}: > + # Test policy longer than 32 chars fails stable. > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr 'jfdkkkkjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjffjfjfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff' > + > + # Test policy specified correctly. Must pass. > + _set_sysfs_policy $dev $attr $policy > + > + # If the policy has no value return > + if [[ -z $value ]]; then > + return > + fi > + > + # Test value specified wrongly. Must fail. > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'$policy: $value'" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'$policy:$value '" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'$policy:$value typo'" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'$policy:${value}typo'" > + _set_sysfs_policy_must_fail $dev $attr "'$policy :$value'" > + > + # Test policy and value all specified correctly. Must pass. > + _set_sysfs_policy $dev $attr $policy:$value > +} > -- > 2.47.0 > >