[PATCH 15/16] pramfs: test module

[PATCH 15/16] pramfs: test module

[Marco Stornelli]

From: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@gmail.com>

Test module.

Signed-off-by: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
---
diff -Nurp linux-2.6.36-orig/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c linux-2.6.36/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c
--- linux-2.6.36-orig/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c	1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.36/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c	2010-09-14 18:49:52.000000000 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+/*
+ * FILE NAME fs/pramfs/namei.c
+ *
+ * BRIEF DESCRIPTION
+ *
+ * Pramfs test module.
+ *
+ * Copyright 2009-2010 Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
+ * Copyright 2003 Sony Corporation
+ * Copyright 2003 Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.
+ * 2003-2004 (c) MontaVista Software, Inc. , Steve Longerbeam
+ * This file is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public
+ * License version 2. This program is licensed "as is" without any
+ * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.
+ */
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/version.h>
+#include <linux/init.h>
+#include <linux/fs.h>
+#include "pram.h"
+
+int __init test_pramfs_write(void)
+{
+	struct pram_super_block *psb;
+
+	psb = get_pram_super();
+	if (!psb) {
+		printk(KERN_ERR
+		"%s: PRAMFS super block not found (not mounted?)\n",
+		__func__);
+		return 1;
+	}
+
+	/*
+	 * Attempt an unprotected clear of checksum information in the
+	 * superblock, this should cause a kernel page protection fault.
+	 */
+	printk("%s: writing to kernel VA %p\n", __func__, psb);
+	psb->s_sum = 0;
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+void test_pramfs_write_cleanup(void) {}
+
+/* Module information */
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
+module_init(test_pramfs_write);
+module_exit(test_pramfs_write_cleanup);
 

Re: [PATCH 15/16] pramfs: test module

[Randy Dunlap]

On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 18:37:49 +0200 Marco Stornelli wrote:

> From: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
> 
> Test module.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
> ---
> diff -Nurp linux-2.6.36-orig/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c linux-2.6.36/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c
> --- linux-2.6.36-orig/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c	1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.36/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c	2010-09-14 18:49:52.000000000 +0200
> @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
> +/*
> + * FILE NAME fs/pramfs/namei.c
> + *
> + * BRIEF DESCRIPTION
> + *
> + * Pramfs test module.
> + *
> + * Copyright 2009-2010 Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
> + * Copyright 2003 Sony Corporation
> + * Copyright 2003 Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.
> + * 2003-2004 (c) MontaVista Software, Inc. , Steve Longerbeam
> + * This file is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public
> + * License version 2. This program is licensed "as is" without any
> + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.
> + */
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/version.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/fs.h>
> +#include "pram.h"
> +
> +int __init test_pramfs_write(void)
> +{
> +	struct pram_super_block *psb;
> +
> +	psb = get_pram_super();
> +	if (!psb) {
> +		printk(KERN_ERR
> +		"%s: PRAMFS super block not found (not mounted?)\n",
> +		__func__);

Above 2 lines need to indented more.

> +		return 1;
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Attempt an unprotected clear of checksum information in the
> +	 * superblock, this should cause a kernel page protection fault.
> +	 */
> +	printk("%s: writing to kernel VA %p\n", __func__, psb);
> +	psb->s_sum = 0;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +void test_pramfs_write_cleanup(void) {}
> +
> +/* Module information */
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> +module_init(test_pramfs_write);
> +module_exit(test_pramfs_write_cleanup);


---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***

Re: [PATCH 15/16] pramfs: test module

[Marco Stornelli]

2010/10/10 Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>:
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 18:37:49 +0200 Marco Stornelli wrote:
>
> Above 2 lines need to indented more.
>

Ack.

>> +             return 1;
>> +     }
>> +
>> +     /*
>> +      * Attempt an unprotected clear of checksum information in the
>> +      * superblock, this should cause a kernel page protection fault.
>> +      */
>> +     printk("%s: writing to kernel VA %p\n", __func__, psb);
>> +     psb->s_sum = 0;
>> +
>> +     return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +void test_pramfs_write_cleanup(void) {}
>> +
>> +/* Module information */
>> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>> +module_init(test_pramfs_write);
>> +module_exit(test_pramfs_write_cleanup);
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 15/16] pramfs: test module

[Kieran Bingham]

  On 10/10/2010 17:37, Marco Stornelli wrote:
> From: Marco Stornelli<marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
>
> Test module.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marco Stornelli<marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
> ---
> diff -Nurp linux-2.6.36-orig/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c linux-2.6.36/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c
> --- linux-2.6.36-orig/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c	1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.36/fs/pramfs/pramfs_test.c	2010-09-14 18:49:52.000000000 +0200
> @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
> +/*
> + * FILE NAME fs/pramfs/namei.c
FILE NAME != namei.c

Re: [PATCH 15/16] pramfs: test module

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 01:24:04PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote:
> >@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
> >+/*
> >+ * FILE NAME fs/pramfs/namei.c
> FILE NAME != namei.c

Yes, that's why you should never do such filename comments which are not
only utterly prone to be out of data, but also 100% useless.