From: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
To: Marcos Paulo de Souza <mpdesouza@suse.com>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: livepatch: Test atomic replace against multiple modules
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 15:44:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZloormpDnnc4SDub@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240525-lp-atomic-replace-v2-1-142199bb65a1@suse.com>
On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 11:34:08AM -0300, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
> Adapt the current test-livepatch.sh script to account the number of
> applied livepatches and ensure that an atomic replace livepatch disables
> all previously applied livepatches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza <mpdesouza@suse.com>
> ---
> Changes since v1:
> * Added checks in the existing test-livepatch.sh instead of creating a
> new test file. (Joe)
> * Fixed issues reported by ShellCheck (Joe)
> ---
> .../testing/selftests/livepatch/test-livepatch.sh | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test-livepatch.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test-livepatch.sh
> index e3455a6b1158..d85405d18e54 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test-livepatch.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/test-livepatch.sh
> @@ -107,9 +107,12 @@ livepatch: '$MOD_LIVEPATCH': unpatching complete
>
> # - load a livepatch that modifies the output from /proc/cmdline and
> # verify correct behavior
> -# - load an atomic replace livepatch and verify that only the second is active
> -# - remove the first livepatch and verify that the atomic replace livepatch
> -# is still active
> +# - load two addtional livepatches and check the number of livepatch modules
> +# applied
> +# - load an atomic replace livepatch and check that the other three modules were
> +# disabled
> +# - remove all livepatches besides the atomic replace one and verify that the
> +# atomic replace livepatch is still active
> # - remove the atomic replace livepatch and verify that none are active
>
> start_test "atomic replace livepatch"
> @@ -119,12 +122,31 @@ load_lp $MOD_LIVEPATCH
> grep 'live patched' /proc/cmdline > /dev/kmsg
> grep 'live patched' /proc/meminfo > /dev/kmsg
>
> +for mod in test_klp_syscall test_klp_callbacks_demo; do
Slightly nitpicky here, but the tests were originally written with the
livepatch module names via variables like $MOD_LIVEPATCH. Would using
$MOD_LIVEPATCH{1,2,3} help indicate that their specifics aren't really
interesting, that we just need 3 of them?
> + load_lp $mod
> +done
> +
> +mods=(/sys/kernel/livepatch/*)
> +nmods=${#mods[@]}
> +if [ "$nmods" -ne 3 ]; then
> + die "Expecting three modules listed, found $nmods"
> +fi
> +
I was going to suggest that we might protect against a situation where
other livepatch modules were active, that a simple count wouldn't be
sufficient. But then I thought about this test, atomic replace!
Anything previously loaded is going to be pushed aside anyway.
So maybe (in another patch or set) it would be worth enhancing
functions.sh :: start_test() do a quick sanity check to see that the
initial conditions are safe? That might also prevent some collateral
damage when test A fails and leaves the world a strange place for tests
B, C, etc.
> load_lp $MOD_REPLACE replace=1
>
> grep 'live patched' /proc/cmdline > /dev/kmsg
> grep 'live patched' /proc/meminfo > /dev/kmsg
>
> -unload_lp $MOD_LIVEPATCH
> +mods=(/sys/kernel/livepatch/*)
> +nmods=${#mods[@]}
> +if [ "$nmods" -ne 1 ]; then
> + die "Expecting only one moduled listed, found $nmods"
> +fi
> +
> +# These modules were disabled by the atomic replace
> +for mod in test_klp_callbacks_demo test_klp_syscall $MOD_LIVEPATCH; do
> + unload_lp "$mod"
> +done
>
> grep 'live patched' /proc/cmdline > /dev/kmsg
> grep 'live patched' /proc/meminfo > /dev/kmsg
> @@ -142,6 +164,20 @@ livepatch: '$MOD_LIVEPATCH': starting patching transition
> livepatch: '$MOD_LIVEPATCH': completing patching transition
> livepatch: '$MOD_LIVEPATCH': patching complete
> $MOD_LIVEPATCH: this has been live patched
> +% insmod test_modules/test_klp_syscall.ko
Similar minor nit here, too. If we think copy/pasting all the $MOD_FOO
is annoying, I am fine with leaving this as is. I don't have a strong
opinion other than following some convention.
With that, I'm happy to ack as-is or with variable names.
Acked-by: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
--
Joe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-31 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-25 14:34 [PATCH v2] selftests: livepatch: Test atomic replace against multiple modules Marcos Paulo de Souza
2024-05-28 15:01 ` Petr Mladek
2024-05-29 14:05 ` Miroslav Benes
2024-05-31 19:44 ` Joe Lawrence [this message]
2024-05-31 21:06 ` Marcos Paulo de Souza
2024-06-03 12:52 ` Petr Mladek
2024-06-03 17:29 ` Marcos Paulo de Souza
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZloormpDnnc4SDub@redhat.com \
--to=joe.lawrence@redhat.com \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbenes@suse.cz \
--cc=mpdesouza@suse.com \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox