linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests/exec: Avoid future NULL argv execve warning

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]

Date:   Wed, 2 Feb 2022 10:38:57 -0700
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Ariadne Conill <ariadne@...eferenced.org>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/exec: Avoid future NULL argv execve warning

On 2/2/22 8:13 AM, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 04:08:07PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Build actual argv for launching recursion test to avoid future warning
>> about using an empty argv in execve().
> 
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/exec/recursion-depth.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/exec/recursion-depth.c
>> @@ -24,8 +24,14 @@
>>   #include <sys/mount.h>
>>   #include <unistd.h>
>>   
>> +#define FILENAME "/tmp/1"
>> +#define HASHBANG "#!" FILENAME "\n"
>> +
>>   int main(void)
>>   {
>> +	char * const argv[] = { FILENAME, NULL };
>> +	int rv;
> 
> Can we move out of -Wdeclaration-after-statement mentality in tests at least?

selftest like the rest of the kernel follows the same coding guidelines.
It will follow the moving "-Wdeclaration-after-statement mentality" when
the rest of the kernel does.

Looks like this topic was discussed in the following:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-kbuild/patch/c6fda26e8d134264b04fadc3386d6c32@gmail.com/

thanks,
-- Shuah