linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests: breakpoints: convert breakpoint_test

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: <7f404d76-ef5e-eb20-dc57-6deb75909924@osg.samsung.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jun 2017 10:53:22 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>
To:     Paul Elder <paul.elder@...t.edu>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     panand@...hat.com, will.deacon@....com, labath@...gle.com,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: breakpoints: convert breakpoint_test_arm64
 test to TAP13

On 06/27/2017 10:50 AM, Paul Elder wrote:
> On 06/28/2017 01:36 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 06/27/2017 10:11 AM, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:04:47AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>>> Convert breakpoint_test_arm64 output to TAP13 format.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  .../selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c  | 114 ++++++++++++++-------
>>>>  1 file changed, 79 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c b/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c
>>>> index fa6d57af5217..d13bd0dea13e 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c
>>>> @@ -41,20 +41,27 @@ static volatile uint8_t var[96] __attribute__((__aligned__(32)));
>>>>  static void child(int size, int wr)
>>>>  {
>>>>  	volatile uint8_t *addr = &var[32 + wr];
>>>> +	char msg_buf[512];
>>>>  
>>>>  	if (ptrace(PTRACE_TRACEME, 0, NULL, NULL) != 0) {
>>>> -		perror("ptrace(PTRACE_TRACEME) failed");
>>>> -		_exit(1);
>>>> +		snprintf(msg_buf, sizeof(msg_buf),
>>>> +			 "ptrace(PTRACE_TRACEME) failed: %s\n",
>>>> +			 strerror(errno));
>>>> +		ksft_exit_fail_msg(msg_buf);
>>>
>>> No objection to this patch, but perhaps the "msg" functions could either
>>> be variable arg macros, or just a printk() like function that can take
>>> the string and anything you want to send to it.
>>
>> Right. Changing "msg" functions to take var args will make things easier.
>> I will take care of that and use this test for a use-case.
> I was going to work on this...

Yeah. Thanks for the reminder. I suggested making these var args and did as
you to do this already.

> Do you want to take care of it or can I do it?

Please take care of it. I will do the breakpoints_test_arm64 on top of
yours.

thanks,
-- Shuah

> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Paul
> 
>>>
>>> So this could be:
>>> 		ksft_exit_fail_msg("ptrace(PTRACE_TRACEME) failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
>>
>> Right.
>>
>>>
>>> Anyway, just a thought, might make conversions a lot easier, no need for
>>> intermediate buffers> 
>>> thanks,
>>>
>>> greg k-h
>>>
>>
>> thanks,
>> -- Shuah
>>