Re: [PATCH v6 3/4] kunit: Taint the kernel when KUnit tests are run

David Gow
2022-07-09T03:35:44Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2590 bytes --]

On Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 5:24 AM Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On 7/8/22 3:22 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On 7/8/22 3:00 PM, Daniel Latypov wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 1:22 PM Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 7/7/22 10:48 PM, David Gow wrote:
> >>>> Make KUnit trigger the new TAINT_TEST taint when any KUnit test is run.
> >>>> Due to KUnit tests not being intended to run on production systems, and
> >>>> potentially causing problems (or security issues like leaking kernel
> >>>> addresses), the kernel's state should not be considered safe for
> >>>> production use after KUnit tests are run.
> >>>>
> >>>> This both marks KUnit modules as test modules using MODULE_INFO() and
> >>>> manually taints the kernel when tests are run (which catches builtin
> >>>> tests).
> >>>>
> >>>> Acked-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> >>>> Tested-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>
> >>>> No changes since v5:
> >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220702040959.3232874-3-davidgow@google.com/
> >>>>
> >>>> No changes since v4:
> >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220701084744.3002019-3-davidgow@google.com/
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> David, Brendan, Andrew,
> >>>
> >>> Just confirming the status of these patches. I applied v4 1/3 and v4 3/4
> >>> to linux-kselftest kunit for 5.20-rc1.
> >>> I am seeing v5 and v6 now. Andrew applied v5 looks like. Would you like
> >>> me to drop the two I applied? Do we have to refresh with v6?
> >>
> >> Just noting here that there'll be a merge conflict between this patch
> >> (3/4) and some other patches lined up to go through the kunit tree:
> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-kselftest/patch/20220625050838.1618469-2-davidgow@google.com/
> >>
> >> Not sure how we want to handle that.
> >>
> >
> > I can go drop the two patches and have Andrew carry the series through
> > mm tree.
> >
>
> Sorry spoke too soon. Yes there are others that might have conflicts as
> Daniel pointed out:
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-kselftest/patch/20220625050838.1618469-2-davidgow@google.com/
>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
>

Thanks everyone for pointing these out.

I've rebased the other series (the KUnit module support one:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220709032001.819487-1-davidgow@google.com/
) on top of this.

If they all go in via the kselftest/kunit tree, everything should be fine now.

Cheers,
-- David

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4003 bytes --]