Re: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an assert step mechanism
From: Kees Cook <hidden>
Date: 2017-04-19 00:03:08
Also in:
linux-security-module, lkml, netdev
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Mickaël Salaün [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
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 <redacted> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <redacted> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <redacted> Cc: Kees Cook <redacted> Cc: Shuah Khan <redacted> Cc: Will Drewry <redacted> --- 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?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
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