| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 11:37:44 +0800
From: Coly Li <colyli@...e.de>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] lib/test_crc: Add test cases for crc calculation
On 2018/7/17 2:05 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 07/16/2018 09:55 AM, Coly Li wrote:
>> This patch adds a kernel module to test the consistency of multiple crc
>> calculation in Linux kernel. It is enabled with CONFIG_TEST_CRC enabled.
>>
>> The test results are printed into kernel message, which look like,
>>
>> test_crc: crc64_le: PASSED (0x4e6b1ff972fa8c55, expval 0x4e6b1ff972fa8c55)
>> test_crc: crc64_le_bch: PASSED (0x0e4f1391d7a4a62e, expval 0x0e4f1391d7a4a62e)
>> test_crc: crc64_le_update: FAILED (0x03d4d0d85685d9a1, expval 0x3d4d0d85685d9a1f)
>>
>> kernel 0day system has framework to check kernel message, then the above
>> result can be handled by 0day system. If crc calculation inconsistency
>> happens, it can be detected quite soon.
>>
Hi Randy,
>> lib/test_crc.c can is a testing frame work for all crc consistency
>
> drop ^^^ "can"
>
All the following issues are fixed in v2 series, thank you for the review.
> Well, we already have (from lib/Makefile):
> obj-$(CONFIG_CRC32_SELFTEST) += crc32test.o
>
> so lib/test_crc.c isn't exactly "for all crc".
>
My plan is to add extra consistency test cases for crc32/crc32c for
consistency testing. Consistency testing case is much simpler than the
code in crc32test.c, the results of test_crc.c are in unified format so
0day testing can handle them in a simple way.
I agree with you that 'for all crc' is inaccurate before the
crc32/crc32c test cases added into test_crc. So in v2 series, it will be
modified to 'for many crc consistency testings'.
Thanks.
Coly Li
>
>> testings. For now, there are only test caes for 3 crc routines,
>> - crc64_le()
>> - crc64_le_bch()
>> - crc64_le_update()
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Coly Li <colyli@...e.de>
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>> Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...e.com>
>> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>> Cc: Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>
>> ---
>> lib/Kconfig.debug | 11 ++++
>> lib/Makefile | 1 +
>> lib/test_crc.c | 136 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 3 files changed, 148 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 lib/test_crc.c
>
>
>> diff --git a/lib/test_crc.c b/lib/test_crc.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..3a9442252de5
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/lib/test_crc.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,136 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>> +/*
>> + * CRC test driver
>> + *
>> + * Copyright (C) 2018 Coly Li <colyli@...e.de>
>> + *
>> + * This module provides an simple framework to check the consistency of
>> + * Linux kernel crc calculation routines in lib/crc*.c. This driver
>
> CRC
>
>> + * requires CONFIG_CRC* items to be enabled if the associated routines are
>> + * tested here. The test results will be printed to kernel message
>> + * when this test driver is loaded.
>> + *
>> + * Current test routines are,
>> + * - crc64_le()
>> + * - crc64_le_bch()
>> + * - crc64_le_update()
>> + *
>> + */
>> +
>> +#include <linux/init.h>
>> +#include <linux/list.h>
>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>> +#include <linux/printk.h>
>> +#include <linux/fs.h>
>> +#include <linux/miscdevice.h>
>> +#include <linux/slab.h>
>> +#include <linux/uaccess.h>
>> +#include <linux/async.h>
>> +#include <linux/delay.h>
>> +#include <linux/vmalloc.h>
>> +#include <linux/crc64.h>
>> +
>> +struct crc_test_record {
>> +
>> + char *name;
>> + __le64 data[4];
>> + __le64 initval;
>> + __le64 expval;
>> + int (*handler)(struct crc_test_record *rec);
>> +};
>> +
>> +static int chk_and_msg(const char *name, __le64 crc, __le64 expval)
>> +{
>> + int ret = 0;
>> +
>> + if (crc == expval) {
>> + pr_info("test_crc: %s: PASSED:(0x%016llx, expval 0x%016llx)",
>> + name, crc, expval);
>> + } else {
>> + pr_err("test_crc: %s: FAILED:(0x%016llx, expval 0x%016llx)",
>> + name, crc, expval);
>
> For both pr_err() lines, please print "expected" instead of "expval".
>
>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* Add your crc test caese here */
>
> CRC test cases
>
>> +static int test_crc64_le(struct crc_test_record *rec)
>> +{
>> + __le64 crc;
>> +
>> + crc = crc64_le(rec->data, sizeof(rec->data));
>> + return chk_and_msg(rec->name, crc, rec->expval);
>> +
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int test_crc64_le_bch(struct crc_test_record *rec)
>> +{
>> + __le64 crc;
>> +
>> + crc = crc64_le_bch(rec->data, sizeof(rec->data));
>> + return chk_and_msg(rec->name, crc, rec->expval);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int test_crc64_le_update(struct crc_test_record *rec)
>> +{
>> + __le64 crc = rec->initval;
>> +
>> + crc = crc64_le_update(crc, rec->data, sizeof(rec->data));
>> + return chk_and_msg(rec->name, crc, rec->expval);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Set up your crc test initial data here.
>> + * Do not change the existing items, they are hard coded with
>> + * pre-calculated values.
>> + */
>> +static struct crc_test_record test_data[] = {
>> + { .name = "crc64_le",
>> + .data = { 0x42F0E1EBA9EA3693, 0x85E1C3D753D46D26,
>> + 0xC711223CFA3E5BB5, 0x493366450E42ECDF },
>> + .initval = 0,
>> + .expval = 0xe2b9911e7b997201,
>> + .handler = test_crc64_le,
>> + },
>> + { .name = "crc64_le_bch",
>> + .data = { 0x42F0E1EBA9EA3693, 0x85E1C3D753D46D26,
>> + 0xC711223CFA3E5BB5, 0x493366450E42ECDF },
>> + .initval = 0,
>> + .expval = 0xd2753a20fd862892,
>> + .handler = test_crc64_le_bch,
>> + },
>> + { .name = "crc64_le_update",
>> + .data = { 0x42F0E1EBA9EA3693, 0x85E1C3D753D46D26,
>> + 0xC711223CFA3E5BB5, 0x493366450E42ECDF },
>> + .initval = 0x61C8864680B583EB,
>> + .expval = 0xb2c863673f4292bf,
>> + .handler = test_crc64_le_update,
>> + },
>> + { .name = NULL, }
>> +};
>> +
>> +
>> +static int __init test_crc_init(void)
>> +{
>> + int i;
>> + int v, ret = 0;
>> +
>> + pr_info("Kernel crc consitency testing:");
>
> CRC consistency
>
>> + for (i = 0; test_data[i].name; i++) {
>> + v = test_data[i].handler(&test_data[i]);
>> + if (v < 0 && ret == 0)
>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +late_initcall(test_crc_init);
>> +
>> +static void __exit test_crc_exit(void) { }
>> +module_exit(test_crc_exit);
>> +
>> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("CRC consistency testing driver");
>> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Coly Li <colyli@...e.de>");
>> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>>
>
>
> thanks,
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists