Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1625741 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-04-19 02:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-04-20 00:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 5 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an assert step mechanism Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-04-19 02:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an assert step mechanism Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> - 2017-04-20 00:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an assert step mechanism Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> - 2017-04-20 00:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an assert step mechanism Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-04-20 04:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an assert step mechanism Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> - 2017-04-20 00:10 +0200
| From | Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-19 02:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an assert step mechanism |
| Message-ID | <txLm2-4su-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> 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: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
> Cc: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
> ---
> 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?
> 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?
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-20 00:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ty5NM-b4-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1625741 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 19/04/2017 02:02, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> 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: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
>> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
>> ---
>> 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?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-20 00:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ty5Xs-ug-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1626827 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 20/04/2017 00:02, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> wrote:
>>
>> On 19/04/2017 02:02, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> 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: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
>>>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
>>>> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
>>>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>>>> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
>>>> Cc: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
>>>> ---
>>>> 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!
>
> -Kees
>
>
Good, in which place and name would it fit better?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-20 04:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ty9y2-2DC-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1626832 |
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 20/04/2017 00:02, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/04/2017 02:02, Kees Cook wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> 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: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
>>>>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
>>>>> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
>>>>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>>>>> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
>>>>> Cc: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> 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
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-20 00:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ty5Xs-ug-25@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1626827 |
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> wrote:
>
> On 19/04/2017 02:02, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> 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: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
>>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
>>> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>>> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
>>> ---
>>> 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!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web