Re: [PATCH v10 2/6] selftests/Landlock: general scoped restriction tests
From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
Date: 2024-08-20 15:58:08
Also in:
lkml, netdev
"Re: [PATCH v10 2/6] selftests/Landlock: general scoped restriction" This subject is still incorrect, please use this instead: "selftests/landlock: Add common scope tests" The same rule for the subject prefix should be followed for all other commits (see my previous review). On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 10:08:52PM -0600, Tahera Fahimi wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
The test function, "ruleset_with_unknown_scoped", is designed to validate the behaviour of the "landlock_create_ruleset" function when it is provided with an unsupported or unknown scoped mask. Signed-off-by: Tahera Fahimi <redacted> --- .../testing/selftests/landlock/scoped_test.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+) create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/landlock/scoped_test.cdiff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/scoped_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/scoped_test.c new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..aee853582451 --- /dev/null +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/scoped_test.c@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 +/* + * Landlock tests - Scope Restriction
Landlock tests - Common scope restrictions
+ * + * Copyright © 2024 Tahera Fahimi [off-list ref] + */ + +#define _GNU_SOURCE +#include <errno.h> +#include <linux/landlock.h> +#include <sys/prctl.h> + +#include "common.h" + +#define ACCESS_LAST LANDLOCK_SCOPED_ABSTRACT_UNIX_SOCKET + +TEST(ruleset_with_unknown_scoped)
"ruleset_with_unknown_scope" makes more sense (also in the commit message).
+{
+ __u64 scoped_mask;
+
+ for (scoped_mask = 1ULL << 63; scoped_mask != ACCESS_LAST;
+ scoped_mask >>= 1) {
+ struct landlock_ruleset_attr ruleset_attr = {
+ .scoped = scoped_mask,
+ };
+
+ ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_create_ruleset(&ruleset_attr,
+ sizeof(ruleset_attr), 0));
+ ASSERT_EQ(EINVAL, errno);
+ }
+}Good!
+ +TEST_HARNESS_MAIN -- 2.34.1