From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: keescook@chromium.org (Kees Cook) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:50:37 -0700 Subject: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an assert step mechanism In-Reply-To: References: <20170328234650.19695-1-mic@digikod.net> <20170328234650.19695-10-mic@digikod.net> <94ac6ddc-eaac-8548-f83f-826ddf05ac69@digikod.net> Message-ID: To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Micka?l Sala?n wrote: > > > On 20/04/2017 00:02, Kees Cook wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Micka?l Sala?n wrote: >>> >>> On 19/04/2017 02:02, Kees Cook wrote: >>>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Micka?l Sala?n wrote: >>>>> This is useful to return an information about the error without being >>>>> able to write to TH_LOG_STREAM. >>>>> >>>>> Helpers from test_harness.h may be useful outside of the seccomp >>>>> directory. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Micka?l Sala?n >>>>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski >>>>> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo >>>>> Cc: Kees Cook >>>>> Cc: Shuah Khan >>>>> Cc: Will Drewry >>>>> --- >>>>> tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h | 8 +++++++- >>>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h >>>>> index a786c69c7584..77e407663e06 100644 >>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h >>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h >>>>> @@ -397,7 +397,7 @@ struct __test_metadata { >>>>> const char *name; >>>>> void (*fn)(struct __test_metadata *); >>>>> int termsig; >>>>> - int passed; >>>>> + __s8 passed; >>>> >>>> Why the reduction here? int is signed too? >>> >>> Because the return code of a process is capped to 8 bits and I use a >>> negative value to not mess with the current interpretation of 0 (error) >>> and 1 (OK) for the "passed" variable. >>> >>>> >>>>> int trigger; /* extra handler after the evaluation */ >>>>> struct __test_metadata *prev, *next; >>>>> }; >>>>> @@ -476,6 +476,12 @@ void __run_test(struct __test_metadata *t) >>>>> "instead of by signal (code: %d)\n", >>>>> t->name, >>>>> WEXITSTATUS(status)); >>>>> + } else if (t->passed < 0) { >>>>> + fprintf(TH_LOG_STREAM, >>>>> + "%s: Failed at step #%d\n", >>>>> + t->name, >>>>> + t->passed * -1); >>>>> + t->passed = 0; >>>>> } >>>> >>>> Instead of creating an overloaded mechanism here, perhaps have an >>>> option reporting mechanism that can be enabled. Like adding to >>>> __test_metadata "bool no_stream; int test_number;" and adding >>>> test_number++ to each ASSERT/EXCEPT call, and doing something like: >>>> >>>> if (t->no_stream) { >>>> fprintf(TH_LOG_STREAM, >>>> "%s: Failed at step #%d\n", >>>> t->name, >>>> t->test_number); >>>> } >>>> >>>> It'd be a cleaner approach, maybe? >>> >>> Good idea, we will then be able to use 255 steps! >>> >>> Do you want me to send this as a separate patch? >>> >>> Can we move test_harness.h outside of the seccomp directory to be >>> available to other subsystems as well? >> >> Yeah, I would do two patches, and send them out separately (to shuah >> with lkml and me in cc at least), one to move test_hardness.h into >> some include/ directory, and then to add the new logic for streamless >> reporting. >> >> Thanks! >> > > Good, in which place and name would it fit better? I've added Shuah to CC. Shuah, where should a common header file for selftests live? Should a new "include" directory be added? -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html