Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1624768 > unrolled thread

Re: [lkp-robot] [KEYS] bdf7c0f8bf: ltp.add_key02.fail

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.

Contents

  Re: [lkp-robot] [KEYS]  bdf7c0f8bf: ltp.add_key02.fail Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-17 19:40 +0200
    Re: [LTP] [lkp-robot] [KEYS]  bdf7c0f8bf: ltp.add_key02.fail Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz> - 2017-04-20 15:00 +0200
      Re: [LTP] [lkp-robot] [KEYS]  bdf7c0f8bf: ltp.add_key02.fail Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com> - 2017-04-21 06:50 +0200

#1624768 — Re: [lkp-robot] [KEYS] bdf7c0f8bf: ltp.add_key02.fail

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 02:26:41PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> 
> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
> 
> commit: bdf7c0f8bf282ba44827ce3c7fd7936c8e90a18a ("KEYS: fix dereferencing NULL payload with nonzero length")
> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Eric-Biggers/KEYS-fix-dereferencing-NULL-payload-with-nonzero-length/20170403-102013
> base: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/jmorris/linux-security.git next
> 
...
> caused below changes (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace):
> 
> 
> user  :notice: [   45.447047] <<<test_start>>>
> 
> user  :notice: [   45.447365] tag=add_key02 stime=1492169102
> 
> user  :notice: [   45.447567] cmdline="add_key02"
> 
> user  :notice: [   45.447685] contacts=""
> 
> user  :notice: [   45.447826] analysis=exit
> 
> user  :notice: [   45.448011] <<<test_output>>>
> 
> user  :notice: [   45.448568] tst_test.c:760: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s
> 
> user  :notice: [   45.449439] add_key02.c:65: FAIL: add_key() failed unexpectedly, expected EINVAL: EFAULT

In my opinion this is a valid behavior, and the test is just weird; it's passing
in *both* an unaddressable payload and an invalid description, so it's not clear
which case it's meant to be testing.  (Generally, if a syscall will fail for
more than one reason, it's not guaranteed which error code you'll get.)

In any case, once we have a fix merged, it would be nice for there to be an ltp
test added for the "NULL payload with nonzero length" case with one of the key
types that crashed the kernel.

Eric

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1627421 — Re: [LTP] [lkp-robot] [KEYS] bdf7c0f8bf: ltp.add_key02.fail

Hi!
> > commit: bdf7c0f8bf282ba44827ce3c7fd7936c8e90a18a ("KEYS: fix dereferencing NULL payload with nonzero length")
> > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Eric-Biggers/KEYS-fix-dereferencing-NULL-payload-with-nonzero-length/20170403-102013
> > base: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/jmorris/linux-security.git next
> > 
> ...
> > caused below changes (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace):
> > 
> > 
> > user  :notice: [   45.447047] <<<test_start>>>
> > 
> > user  :notice: [   45.447365] tag=add_key02 stime=1492169102
> > 
> > user  :notice: [   45.447567] cmdline="add_key02"
> > 
> > user  :notice: [   45.447685] contacts=""
> > 
> > user  :notice: [   45.447826] analysis=exit
> > 
> > user  :notice: [   45.448011] <<<test_output>>>
> > 
> > user  :notice: [   45.448568] tst_test.c:760: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s
> > 
> > user  :notice: [   45.449439] add_key02.c:65: FAIL: add_key() failed unexpectedly, expected EINVAL: EFAULT
> 
> In my opinion this is a valid behavior, and the test is just weird; it's passing
> in *both* an unaddressable payload and an invalid description, so it's not clear
> which case it's meant to be testing.  (Generally, if a syscall will fail for
> more than one reason, it's not guaranteed which error code you'll get.)

That is quite common problem with LTP testcases. Do you care to send a
patch or should I fix that?

> In any case, once we have a fix merged, it would be nice for there to be an ltp
> test added for the "NULL payload with nonzero length" case with one of the key
> types that crashed the kernel.

Here as well, feel free to send a patch or at least point us to a
reproducer that could be turned into a testcase.

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1627949 — Re: [LTP] [lkp-robot] [KEYS] bdf7c0f8bf: ltp.add_key02.fail

Hi Cyril,

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:57:50PM +0200, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
> > 
> > In my opinion this is a valid behavior, and the test is just weird; it's passing
> > in *both* an unaddressable payload and an invalid description, so it's not clear
> > which case it's meant to be testing.  (Generally, if a syscall will fail for
> > more than one reason, it's not guaranteed which error code you'll get.)
> 
> That is quite common problem with LTP testcases. Do you care to send a
> patch or should I fix that?
> 

I'll plan to send a patch.  Also, it looks like the testing that LTP does of
add_key() is very sparse, so I'll try to extend it a bit.

> > In any case, once we have a fix merged, it would be nice for there to be an ltp
> > test added for the "NULL payload with nonzero length" case with one of the key
> > types that crashed the kernel.
> 
> Here as well, feel free to send a patch or at least point us to a
> reproducer that could be turned into a testcase.
> 

I'll plan to send a patch for that as well.

Thanks,

Eric

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web