linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests/exec: allow shell return code of 126

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

Date:	Mon, 05 Jan 2015 12:03:39 -0700
From:	Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>
To:	David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/exec: allow shell return code of 126

On 01/05/2015 04:19 AM, David Drysdale wrote:
> When the shell fails to invoke a script because its path name
> is too long (ENAMETOOLONG), most shells return 127 to indicate
> command not found.  However, some systems report 126 (which POSIX
> suggests should indicate a non-executable file) for this case,
> so allow that too.
> 
> Reported-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
> Signed-off-by: David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/exec/execveat.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/exec/execveat.c b/tools/testing/selftests/exec/execveat.c
> index d273624c93a6..0d940c6e26bd 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/exec/execveat.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/exec/execveat.c
> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ static int _check_execveat_fail(int fd, const char *path, int flags,
>  }
>  
>  static int check_execveat_invoked_rc(int fd, const char *path, int flags,
> -				     int expected_rc)
> +				     int expected_rc, int expected_rc2)

This logic doesn't scale well if there other expected return
values to account for. Please think about a re-write to handle
multiple expected return codes.


>  {
>  	int status;
>  	int rc;
> @@ -99,9 +99,19 @@ static int check_execveat_invoked_rc(int fd, const char *path, int flags,
>  		return 1;
>  	}
>  	if (WEXITSTATUS(status) != expected_rc) {
> -		printf("[FAIL] (child %d exited with %d not %d)\n",
> -			child, WEXITSTATUS(status), expected_rc);
> -		return 1;
> +		if (expected_rc != expected_rc2) {

Please collapse expected_rc and expected_rc2 checks. You can rephrase
the error message to work for both cases.

thanks,
-- Shuah

-- 
Shuah Khan
Sr. Linux Kernel Developer
Open Source Innovation Group
Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley)
shuahkh@....samsung.com | (970) 217-8978
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/