Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] kselftest: vm: add tests for memory-deny-write-execute
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Date: 2022-10-28 17:04:42
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 04:04:57PM +0100, Joey Gouly wrote:
Add some tests to cover the new PR_SET_MDWE prctl.
Some comments below but they're all stylistic and let's not make perfect be the enemy of the good here so Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> and we can iterate later rather than blocking anything on the testcase.
+#ifdef __aarch64__ +#define PROT_BTI 0x10 /* BTI guarded page */ +#endif
We should get this from the kernel headers shouldn't we? We generally rely on things getting pulled in from there rather than locally defining.
+#define TEST1 "mmap(PROT_WRITE | PROT_EXEC)\n" +#define TEST2 "mmap(PROT_WRITE); mprotect(PROT_EXEC)\n" +#define TEST3 "mmap(PROT_EXEC); mprotect(PROT_EXEC | PROT_READ)\n" +#define TEST4 "mmap(PROT_EXEC); mprotect(PROT_EXEC | PROT_BTI)\n"
+int test1(int mdwe_enabled)
+{
It feels like we could usefully make an array of
struct test {
int (*run)(bool mdwe_enabled);
char *name;
}
then we'd need fewer ifdefs, things could be more usefully named and
it'd be a bit easier to add new cases.
+#ifdef __aarch64__ + ksft_set_plan(12); +#else + ksft_set_plan(9); +#endif
That'd just be ksft_test_plan(3 * ARRAY_SIZE(tests).
+ // First run the tests without MDWE + test_result(test1(0), TEST1); + test_result(test2(0), TEST2); + test_result(test3(0), TEST3); +#ifdef __aarch64__ + test_result(test4(0), TEST4); +#endif
and these calls to the tests would all be iterating over the array.