lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 03:10:09 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name> To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests, x86, pkeys: test with random, unallocated protection keys On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 02:26:04PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > Shuah, I assume you'll take this patch in through the selftests tree. > > -- > From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com> > > The kernel pkeys code had a minor bug where it did some large shifts > to an integer which is undefined behavior in C. It didn't cause any > real harm, but it is screwy behavior that the kernel should have > rejected. > > Add a test case for this. > > Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com> > ec: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com> > Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org> > Cc: linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org > Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org > Cc: x86@...nel.org > --- > > b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+) > > diff -puN tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c~pkeys-better-selftests-of-random-pkey tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c~pkeys-better-selftests-of-random-pkey 2017-02-23 14:21:05.168391529 -0800 > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c 2017-02-23 14:23:03.244671815 -0800 > @@ -1123,6 +1123,30 @@ void test_pkey_syscalls_on_non_allocated > } > > /* Assumes that all pkeys other than 'pkey' are unallocated */ > +void test_pkey_syscalls_on_non_allocated_random_pkey(int *ptr, u16 pkey) > +{ > + int err; > + int nr_tests = 0; > + > + while (nr_tests < 1000) { > + int test_pkey = rand(); rand(3) doesn't generate negative numbers. Would be good to cover this case too. int test_pkey = rand() - RAND_MAX/2; ? Otherwise looks good to me. -- Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists