linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] genalloc: selftest

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]

Message-ID: <0183b04c-1fde-4840-2977-c9eea77e0c99@huawei.com>
Date:   Sun, 11 Feb 2018 00:59:58 +0200
From:   Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...wei.com>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        <keescook@...omium.org>, <mhocko@...nel.org>, <labbott@...hat.com>,
        <hch@...radead.org>, <willy@...radead.org>
CC:     <cl@...ux.com>, <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] genalloc: selftest

On 05/02/18 00:19, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 02/04/2018 08:47 AM, Igor Stoppa wrote:

[...]

> Please use kernel multi-line comment style.

ok for all of them

[...]

>> +	BUG_ON(!locations[action->location]);
>> +	print_first_chunk_bitmap(pool);
>> +	BUG_ON(compare_bitmaps(pool, action->pattern));
> 
> BUG_ON() seems harsh to me, but some of the other self-tests also do that.

I would expect that the test never fails, if one is not modifying
anything related to genalloc.

But if an error slips in during development of genalloc or anything
related (like the functions used to scan the bitmaps), I think it's
better to pull the handbrake immediately, because failure in tracking
correctly the memory allocation is likely to cause corruption and every
sort of mysterious weird errors.

--
igor