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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 08:33:04 -0700 From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> Cc: Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@...tuozzo.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>, Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv9 2/2] selftest/x86: add mremap vdso test On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote: > > * Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@...tuozzo.com> wrote: > >> Should print on success: >> [root@...alhost ~]# ./test_mremap_vdso_32 >> AT_SYSINFO_EHDR is 0xf773f000 >> [NOTE] Moving vDSO: [f773f000, f7740000] -> [a000000, a001000] >> [OK] >> Or segfault if landing was bad (before patches): >> [root@...alhost ~]# ./test_mremap_vdso_32 >> AT_SYSINFO_EHDR is 0xf774f000 >> [NOTE] Moving vDSO: [f774f000, f7750000] -> [a000000, a001000] >> Segmentation fault (core dumped) > > So I still think that generating potential segfaults is not a proper way to test a > new feature. How are we supposed to tell the feature still works? I realize that > glibc is a problem here - but that doesn't really change the QA equation: we are > adding new kernel code to help essentially a single application out of tens of > thousands of applications. > > At minimum we should have a robust testcase ... I think it's robust enough. It will print "[OK]" and exit with 0 on success and it will crash on failure. The latter should cause make run_tests to fail reliably. There are some test cases in there that can't avoid crashing on failure unless they were to fork, fail in a child, and then print some text in the parent. That seems like it would be more work than it's worth. --Andy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists