linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCHSET] sanitized pathwalk machinery (v3)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 4 Mar 2020 21:00:31 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHSET] sanitized pathwalk machinery (v3)

On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 09:59:46PM +1100, Aleksa Sarai wrote:

> > FWIW, I'm putting together some litmus tests for pathwalk semantics -
> > one of the things I'd like to discuss at LSF; quite a few codepaths
> > are simply not touched by anything in xfstests.
> 
> I won't be at LSF unfortunately, but this is something I would be very
> interested in helping with -- one of the things I've noticed is the lack
> of a test-suite for some of the more generic VFS bits (such as namei).

BTW, has anyone tried to run tests with oprofile and see how much of the
core kernel gets exercised?  That looks like an obvious thing to try -
at least the places outside of spin_lock_irq() ought to get lit after
a while...

Have any CI folks tried doing that, or am I missing some obvious reason
why that is not feasible?