linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] selftests: pidfd: do not use ksft_exit_skip after ksft_set

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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 7 Jul 2020 09:24:14 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     christian@...uner.io, shuah@...nel.org,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] selftests: pidfd: do not use ksft_exit_skip after
 ksft_set_plan

On 7/7/20 4:19 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Calling ksft_exit_skip after ksft_set_plan results in executing fewer tests
> than planned.  Use ksft_test_result_skip instead.
> 
> The plan passed to ksft_set_plan was wrong, too, so fix it while at it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
> Message-Id: <20200623001547.22255-5-pbonzini@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_test.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++---
>   1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_test.c
> index 7aff2d3b42c0..f65ad4e32353 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/pidfd/pidfd_test.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>   #include <sched.h>
>   #include <signal.h>
>   #include <stdio.h>
> +#include <stdbool.h>
>   #include <stdlib.h>
>   #include <string.h>
>   #include <syscall.h>
> @@ -27,6 +28,8 @@
>   
>   #define MAX_EVENTS 5
>   
> +static bool have_pidfd_send_signal = false;

You don't need to initialize this to false. Rest looks good.

> +
>   static pid_t pidfd_clone(int flags, int *pidfd, int (*fn)(void *))
>   {
>   	size_t stack_size = 1024;
> @@ -56,6 +59,13 @@ static int test_pidfd_send_signal_simple_success(void)
>   	int pidfd, ret;
>   	const char *test_name = "pidfd_send_signal send SIGUSR1";
>   
> +	if (!have_pidfd_send_signal) {
> +		ksft_test_result_skip(
> +			"%s test: pidfd_send_signal() syscall not supported\n",
> +			test_name);
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
>   	pidfd = open("/proc/self", O_DIRECTORY | O_CLOEXEC);
>   	if (pidfd < 0)
>   		ksft_exit_fail_msg(
> @@ -86,6 +96,13 @@ static int test_pidfd_send_signal_exited_fail(void)
>   	pid_t pid;
>   	const char *test_name = "pidfd_send_signal signal exited process";
>   
> +	if (!have_pidfd_send_signal) {
> +		ksft_test_result_skip(
> +			"%s test: pidfd_send_signal() syscall not supported\n",
> +			test_name);
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
>   	pid = fork();
>   	if (pid < 0)
>   		ksft_exit_fail_msg("%s test: Failed to create new process\n",
> @@ -137,6 +154,13 @@ static int test_pidfd_send_signal_recycled_pid_fail(void)
>   	pid_t pid1;
>   	const char *test_name = "pidfd_send_signal signal recycled pid";
>   
> +	if (!have_pidfd_send_signal) {
> +		ksft_test_result_skip(
> +			"%s test: pidfd_send_signal() syscall not supported\n",
> +			test_name);
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
>   	ret = unshare(CLONE_NEWPID);
>   	if (ret < 0)
>   		ksft_exit_fail_msg("%s test: Failed to unshare pid namespace\n",
> @@ -325,15 +349,17 @@ static int test_pidfd_send_signal_syscall_support(void)
>   
>   	ret = sys_pidfd_send_signal(pidfd, 0, NULL, 0);
>   	if (ret < 0) {
> -		if (errno == ENOSYS)
> -			ksft_exit_skip(
> +		if (errno == ENOSYS) {
> +			ksft_test_result_skip(
>   				"%s test: pidfd_send_signal() syscall not supported\n",
>   				test_name);
> -
> +			return 0;
> +		}
>   		ksft_exit_fail_msg("%s test: Failed to send signal\n",
>   				   test_name);
>   	}
>   
> +	have_pidfd_send_signal = true;
>   	close(pidfd);
>   	ksft_test_result_pass(
>   		"%s test: pidfd_send_signal() syscall is supported. Tests can be executed\n",
> @@ -521,7 +547,7 @@ static void test_pidfd_poll_leader_exit(int use_waitpid)
>   int main(int argc, char **argv)
>   {
>   	ksft_print_header();
> -	ksft_set_plan(4);
> +	ksft_set_plan(8);
>   
>   	test_pidfd_poll_exec(0);
>   	test_pidfd_poll_exec(1);
> 

thanks,
-- Shuah