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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 16:43:57 +0000 From: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com> To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> Cc: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>, shuah@...nel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/kselftest/runner/run_one(): Allow running non-executable files From: SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.de> On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 17:07:28 +0200 Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 02:04:59PM +0000, SeongJae Park wrote: > > From: SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.de> > > > > When running a test program, 'run_one()' checks if the program has the > > execution permission and fails if it doesn't. However, it's easy to > > mistakenly missing the permission, as some common tools like 'diff' > > don't support the permission change well[1]. Compared to that, making > > mistakes in the test program's path would only rare, as those are > > explicitly listed in 'TEST_PROGS'. Therefore, it might make more sense > > to resolve the situation on our own and run the program. > > > > For the reason, this commit makes the test program runner function to > > still print the warning message but run the program after giving the > > execution permission in the case. To make nothing corrupted, it also > > restores the permission after running it. > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/mm-commits/YRJisBs9AunccCD4@kroah.com/ > > > > Suggested-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> > > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.de> > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/kselftest/runner.sh | 18 +++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest/runner.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest/runner.sh > > index cc9c846585f0..2eb31e945709 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest/runner.sh > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest/runner.sh > > @@ -65,15 +65,16 @@ run_one() > > > > TEST_HDR_MSG="selftests: $DIR: $BASENAME_TEST" > > echo "# $TEST_HDR_MSG" > > - if [ ! -x "$TEST" ]; then > > - echo -n "# Warning: file $TEST is " > > - if [ ! -e "$TEST" ]; then > > - echo "missing!" > > - else > > - echo "not executable, correct this." > > - fi > > + if [ ! -e "$TEST" ]; then > > + echo "# Warning: file $TEST is missing!" > > echo "not ok $test_num $TEST_HDR_MSG" > > else > > + permission_added="false" > > + if [ ! -x "$TEST" ]; then > > + echo "# Warning: file $TEST is not executable" > > + chmod u+x "$TEST" > > + permission_added="true" > > No, why would you change the permission of a test? What happens if this > is on a read-only filesystem? You should not be modifying it as it will > end up causing changes when not needed. Agreed. I will parse the shebang line and use the interpreter explicitly in the next spin. Thanks, SeongJae Park > > thanks, > > greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists