linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] kunit: support failure from dynamic analysis tools

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: <3774e8c7-4183-d627-8c53-16bdc0bed6eb@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 2 Apr 2021 15:44:50 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
        Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Uriel Guajardo <urielguajardo@...gle.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] kunit: support failure from dynamic analysis tools

On 4/2/21 3:25 PM, Daniel Latypov wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 10:53 AM Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/2/21 2:55 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 7:23 AM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: Uriel Guajardo <urielguajardo@...gle.com>
>>>>
>>>> Add a kunit_fail_current_test() function to fail the currently running
>>>> test, if any, with an error message.
>>>>
>>>> This is largely intended for dynamic analysis tools like UBSAN and for
>>>> fakes.
>>>> E.g. say I had a fake ops struct for testing and I wanted my `free`
>>>> function to complain if it was called with an invalid argument, or
>>>> caught a double-free. Most return void and have no normal means of
>>>> signalling failure (e.g. super_operations, iommu_ops, etc.).
>>>>
>>>> Key points:
>>>> * Always update current->kunit_test so anyone can use it.
>>>>     * commit 83c4e7a0363b ("KUnit: KASAN Integration") only updated it for
>>>>     CONFIG_KASAN=y
>>>>
>>>> * Create a new header <kunit/test-bug.h> so non-test code doesn't have
>>>> to include all of <kunit/test.h> (e.g. lib/ubsan.c)
>>>>
>>>> * Forward the file and line number to make it easier to track down
>>>> failures
>>>>
>>>> * Declare the helper function for nice __printf() warnings about mismatched
>>>> format strings even when KUnit is not enabled.
>>>>
>>>> Example output from kunit_fail_current_test("message"):
>>>> [15:19:34] [FAILED] example_simple_test
>>>> [15:19:34]     # example_simple_test: initializing
>>>> [15:19:34]     # example_simple_test: lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c:24: message
>>>> [15:19:34]     not ok 1 - example_simple_test
>>>>
>>>> Co-developed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Uriel Guajardo <urielguajardo@...gle.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
>>>
>>
>> Please run checkpatch on your patches in the future. I am seeing
>> a few checkpatch readability type improvements that can be made.
>>
>> Please make changes and send v2 with Brendan's Reviewed-by.
> 
> Thanks for the catch.
> checkpatch.pl --strict should now be happy (aside from complaining
> about line wrapping)
> 
> v5 here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20210402212131.835276-1-dlatypov@google.com
> 
> Note: Brendan didn't give an explicit Reviewed-by on the second patch,
> not sure if that was intentional.
> 

No worries. I applied this one as well. I was able to fix it with just
checkpatch --fix option.

All set now.

thanks,
-- Shuah