linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH 1/2] selftests/harness: Run TEARDOWN for ASSERT failures

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <202203251535.4B900BC0@keescook>
Date:   Fri, 25 Mar 2022 15:36:24 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     shuah@...nel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] selftests/harness: Run TEARDOWN for ASSERT failures

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 01:37:20PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 3/24/22 5:19 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > The kselftest test harness has traditionally not run the registered
> > TEARDOWN handler when a test encountered an ASSERT. This creates
> > unexpected situations and tests need to be very careful about using
> > ASSERT, which seems a needless hurdle for test writers.
> > 
> > Because of the harness's design for optional failure handlers, the
> > original implementation of ASSERT used an abort() to immediately
> > stop execution, but that meant the context for running teardown was
> > lost. Instead, use setjmp/longjmp so that teardown can be done.
> > 
> 
> Thanks for the patch. The change look good to me.
> 
> > Failed SETUP routines continue to not be followed by TEARDOWN, though.
> 
> Does this mean failed setup() routines have to handle TEARDOWN? What
> are guidelines to follow for setup() failures?
> 
> Can you add a bit more detail on what you meant by " Failed SETUP
> routines continue to not be followed by TEARDOWN, though".

Sure! It means that any failures in a SETUP need to be cleaned up by the
SETUP, as TEARDOWN won't be run. (As in, this is unchanged from how
things behaved prior to this patch.)

> 
> With that:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>

Thanks!

-- 
Kees Cook