[PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[Amit Vadhavana]

- Remove unnecessary `tctx` variable, use `ctx` directly.
- Simplified code with no functional changes.

Signed-off-by: Amit Vadhavana <av2082000@gmail.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c | 7 +++----
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
index 66dec47e3ca3..732e89fe99c0 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
@@ -56,16 +56,15 @@ TEST(flags_zero_lsm_set_self_attr)
 TEST(flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr)
 {
 	const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
-	char *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
+	struct lsm_ctx *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
 	__u32 size = page_size;
-	struct lsm_ctx *tctx = (struct lsm_ctx *)ctx;
 
 	ASSERT_NE(NULL, ctx);
 	if (attr_lsm_count()) {
-		ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, tctx, &size,
+		ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, ctx, &size,
 					       0));
 	}
-	ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, tctx,
+	ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, ctx,
 					size, 0));
 
 	free(ctx);
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[Casey Schaufler]

On 11/12/2024 10:28 AM, Amit Vadhavana wrote:
> - Remove unnecessary `tctx` variable, use `ctx` directly.
> - Simplified code with no functional changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Amit Vadhavana <av2082000@gmail.com>

Reviewed-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>

> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c | 7 +++----
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
> index 66dec47e3ca3..732e89fe99c0 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
> @@ -56,16 +56,15 @@ TEST(flags_zero_lsm_set_self_attr)
>  TEST(flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr)
>  {
>  	const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
> -	char *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
> +	struct lsm_ctx *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>  	__u32 size = page_size;
> -	struct lsm_ctx *tctx = (struct lsm_ctx *)ctx;
>  
>  	ASSERT_NE(NULL, ctx);
>  	if (attr_lsm_count()) {
> -		ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, tctx, &size,
> +		ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, ctx, &size,
>  					       0));
>  	}
> -	ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, tctx,
> +	ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, ctx,
>  					size, 0));
>  
>  	free(ctx);

Re: [PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[Shuah Khan]

On 11/12/24 11:28, Amit Vadhavana wrote:
> - Remove unnecessary `tctx` variable, use `ctx` directly.
> - Simplified code with no functional changes.
> 

I would rephrase the short to simply say Remove unused variable,
as refactor implies more extensive changes than what this patch
is actually doing.

Please write complete sentences instead of bullet points in the
change log.

How did you find this problem? Do include the details on how
in the change log.

> Signed-off-by: Amit Vadhavana <av2082000@gmail.com>
> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c | 7 +++----
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
> index 66dec47e3ca3..732e89fe99c0 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
> @@ -56,16 +56,15 @@ TEST(flags_zero_lsm_set_self_attr)
>   TEST(flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr)
>   {
>   	const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
> -	char *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
> +	struct lsm_ctx *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);

Why not name this tctx and avoid changes to the ASSERT_EQs
below?

>   	__u32 size = page_size;
> -	struct lsm_ctx *tctx = (struct lsm_ctx *)ctx;
>   
>   	ASSERT_NE(NULL, ctx);
>   	if (attr_lsm_count()) {
> -		ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, tctx, &size,
> +		ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, ctx, &size,
>   					       0));
>   	}
> -	ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, tctx,
> +	ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, ctx,
>   					size, 0));
>   
>   	free(ctx);

You have to change this tctx for sure.

With these changes:

Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

Paul, James,

Please do let me know if you would me to take this through
kselftest tree.

thanks,
-- Shuah

Re: [PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[Casey Schaufler]

On 11/14/2024 8:25 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 11/12/24 11:28, Amit Vadhavana wrote:
>> - Remove unnecessary `tctx` variable, use `ctx` directly.
>> - Simplified code with no functional changes.
>>
>
> I would rephrase the short to simply say Remove unused variable,
> as refactor implies more extensive changes than what this patch
> is actually doing.
>
> Please write complete sentences instead of bullet points in the
> change log.
>
> How did you find this problem? Do include the details on how
> in the change log.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Amit Vadhavana <av2082000@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c | 7 +++----
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>> b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>> index 66dec47e3ca3..732e89fe99c0 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>> @@ -56,16 +56,15 @@ TEST(flags_zero_lsm_set_self_attr)
>>   TEST(flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr)
>>   {
>>       const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
>> -    char *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>> +    struct lsm_ctx *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>
> Why not name this tctx and avoid changes to the ASSERT_EQs
> below?

In the realm of linux security modules ctx is short for "context".
I used tctx here because I was lazy. It would be much better to
drop tctx, even if it means a tiny bit more change.

>
>>       __u32 size = page_size;
>> -    struct lsm_ctx *tctx = (struct lsm_ctx *)ctx;
>>         ASSERT_NE(NULL, ctx);
>>       if (attr_lsm_count()) {
>> -        ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, tctx, &size,
>> +        ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, ctx, &size,
>>                              0));
>>       }
>> -    ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT |
>> LSM_ATTR_PREV, tctx,
>> +    ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT |
>> LSM_ATTR_PREV, ctx,
>>                       size, 0));
>>         free(ctx);
>
> You have to change this tctx for sure.
>
> With these changes:
>
> Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
>
> Paul, James,
>
> Please do let me know if you would me to take this through
> kselftest tree.
>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
>
>

Re: [PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[Shuah Khan]

On 11/14/24 09:55, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> 
> On 11/14/2024 8:25 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 11/12/24 11:28, Amit Vadhavana wrote:
>>> - Remove unnecessary `tctx` variable, use `ctx` directly.
>>> - Simplified code with no functional changes.
>>>
>>
>> I would rephrase the short to simply say Remove unused variable,
>> as refactor implies more extensive changes than what this patch
>> is actually doing.
>>
>> Please write complete sentences instead of bullet points in the
>> change log.
>>
>> How did you find this problem? Do include the details on how
>> in the change log.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Amit Vadhavana <av2082000@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>    tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c | 7 +++----
>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>> b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>> index 66dec47e3ca3..732e89fe99c0 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>> @@ -56,16 +56,15 @@ TEST(flags_zero_lsm_set_self_attr)
>>>    TEST(flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr)
>>>    {
>>>        const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
>>> -    char *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>>> +    struct lsm_ctx *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>>
>> Why not name this tctx and avoid changes to the ASSERT_EQs
>> below?
> 
> In the realm of linux security modules ctx is short for "context".
> I used tctx here because I was lazy. It would be much better to
> drop tctx, even if it means a tiny bit more change.
> 

Makes sense.

Amit, you can ignore this comment about tctx and ctx. Please do fix
others about the change log and short log.

thanks,
-- Shuah

Re: [PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[Amit]

On 14/11/24 10:38 pm, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 11/14/24 09:55, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>>
>> On 11/14/2024 8:25 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>> On 11/12/24 11:28, Amit Vadhavana wrote:
>>>> - Remove unnecessary `tctx` variable, use `ctx` directly.
>>>> - Simplified code with no functional changes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would rephrase the short to simply say Remove unused variable,
>>> as refactor implies more extensive changes than what this patch
>>> is actually doing.
>>>
>>> Please write complete sentences instead of bullet points in the
>>> change log.
V2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241116152136.10635-1-av2082000@gmail.com/
>>> >>> How did you find this problem? Do include the details on how
>>> in the change log.
While exploring the kselftest framework. I found the this problem.
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Amit Vadhavana <av2082000@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c | 7 +++----
>>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>>> b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>>> index 66dec47e3ca3..732e89fe99c0 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>>> @@ -56,16 +56,15 @@ TEST(flags_zero_lsm_set_self_attr)
>>>>    TEST(flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr)
>>>>    {
>>>>        const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
>>>> -    char *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>>>> +    struct lsm_ctx *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>>>
>>> Why not name this tctx and avoid changes to the ASSERT_EQs
>>> below?
>>
>> In the realm of linux security modules ctx is short for "context".
>> I used tctx here because I was lazy. It would be much better to
>> drop tctx, even if it means a tiny bit more change.
>>
> 
> Makes sense.
> 
> Amit, you can ignore this comment about tctx and ctx. Please do fix
> others about the change log and short log.
> 
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
> 

-- 
Thanks,
Amit V.

Re: [PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[Paul Moore]

On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 11:25 AM Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On 11/12/24 11:28, Amit Vadhavana wrote:
> > - Remove unnecessary `tctx` variable, use `ctx` directly.
> > - Simplified code with no functional changes.
> >
>
> I would rephrase the short to simply say Remove unused variable,
> as refactor implies more extensive changes than what this patch
> is actually doing.
>
> Please write complete sentences instead of bullet points in the
> change log.
>
> How did you find this problem? Do include the details on how
> in the change log.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Amit Vadhavana <av2082000@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >   tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c | 7 +++----
> >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
> > index 66dec47e3ca3..732e89fe99c0 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
> > @@ -56,16 +56,15 @@ TEST(flags_zero_lsm_set_self_attr)
> >   TEST(flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr)
> >   {
> >       const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
> > -     char *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
> > +     struct lsm_ctx *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>
> Why not name this tctx and avoid changes to the ASSERT_EQs
> below?
>
> >       __u32 size = page_size;
> > -     struct lsm_ctx *tctx = (struct lsm_ctx *)ctx;
> >
> >       ASSERT_NE(NULL, ctx);
> >       if (attr_lsm_count()) {
> > -             ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, tctx, &size,
> > +             ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, ctx, &size,
> >                                              0));
> >       }
> > -     ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, tctx,
> > +     ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, ctx,
> >                                       size, 0));
> >
> >       free(ctx);
>
> You have to change this tctx for sure.
>
> With these changes:
>
> Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
>
> Paul, James,
>
> Please do let me know if you would me to take this through
> kselftest tree.

Amit has already posted a v2 with the requested changes, but I wanted
to get back to you on this even if this patch is outdated ... Shuah,
what is your preference for things like this?  My general policy is
that patches only affecting one subsystem tree should be taken by the
associated subsystem to minimize merge headaches and other ugliness,
however, the kselftest is an interesting subsystem in that it relies
so heavily on others that I'm not sure my policy makes as much sense
here :)

-- 
paul-moore.com

Re: [PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[Shuah Khan]

On 11/26/24 20:38, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 11:25 AM Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> On 11/12/24 11:28, Amit Vadhavana wrote:
>>> - Remove unnecessary `tctx` variable, use `ctx` directly.
>>> - Simplified code with no functional changes.
>>>
>>
>> I would rephrase the short to simply say Remove unused variable,
>> as refactor implies more extensive changes than what this patch
>> is actually doing.
>>
>> Please write complete sentences instead of bullet points in the
>> change log.
>>
>> How did you find this problem? Do include the details on how
>> in the change log.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Amit Vadhavana <av2082000@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>    tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c | 7 +++----
>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>> index 66dec47e3ca3..732e89fe99c0 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>>> @@ -56,16 +56,15 @@ TEST(flags_zero_lsm_set_self_attr)
>>>    TEST(flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr)
>>>    {
>>>        const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
>>> -     char *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>>> +     struct lsm_ctx *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>>
>> Why not name this tctx and avoid changes to the ASSERT_EQs
>> below?
>>
>>>        __u32 size = page_size;
>>> -     struct lsm_ctx *tctx = (struct lsm_ctx *)ctx;
>>>
>>>        ASSERT_NE(NULL, ctx);
>>>        if (attr_lsm_count()) {
>>> -             ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, tctx, &size,
>>> +             ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, ctx, &size,
>>>                                               0));
>>>        }
>>> -     ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, tctx,
>>> +     ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT | LSM_ATTR_PREV, ctx,
>>>                                        size, 0));
>>>
>>>        free(ctx);
>>
>> You have to change this tctx for sure.
>>
>> With these changes:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
>>
>> Paul, James,
>>
>> Please do let me know if you would me to take this through
>> kselftest tree.
> 
> Amit has already posted a v2 with the requested changes, but I wanted
> to get back to you on this even if this patch is outdated ... Shuah,
> what is your preference for things like this?  My general policy is
> that patches only affecting one subsystem tree should be taken by the
> associated subsystem to minimize merge headaches and other ugliness,
> however, the kselftest is an interesting subsystem in that it relies
> so heavily on others that I'm not sure my policy makes as much sense
> here :)
> 

kselftest patches usually go through subsystem trees because of the
merge problems you mentioned. I take them through kselftest tree
if subsystem maintainers want me to. Some do and I pick them up.

I pick up patches if I don't see response from subsystem maintainers.

thanks,
-- Shuah

Re: [PATCH] selftests: lsm: Refactor `flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr` test

[Paul Moore]

On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 7:00 PM Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> kselftest patches usually go through subsystem trees because of the
> merge problems you mentioned. I take them through kselftest tree
> if subsystem maintainers want me to. Some do and I pick them up.
>
> I pick up patches if I don't see response from subsystem maintainers.

Thanks for the clarification.

-- 
paul-moore.com