linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] kunit: more assertion reworking

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 25 May 2022 09:06:29 -0700
From:   Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
To:     Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] kunit: more assertion reworking

On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 8:56 AM Miguel Ojeda
<miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 5:44 PM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Note: this does change the function signature of
> > kunit_do_failed_assertion, so we'd need to update the rust wrapper in https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/blob/rust/rust/kernel/kunit.rs
> > But otherwise, I don't think this series changes anything on the
> > rust-side.
>
> Thanks for the heads up! I can take care of that.

FYI This probably won't need to happen soon.
I'd mentioned the idea of patch #1, which changes
kunit_do_failed_assertion(), and Brendan didn't seem keen on it
before.

But the diff should be simple, e.g. just something like this:
@@ -38,9 +38,7 @@
             });
             static CONDITION: &'static $crate::str::CStr =
$crate::c_str!(stringify!($cond));
             static ASSERTION: UnaryAssert =
UnaryAssert($crate::bindings::kunit_unary_assert {
-                assert: $crate::bindings::kunit_assert {
-                    format: Some($crate::bindings::kunit_unary_assert_format),
-                },
+                assert: $crate::bindings::kunit_assert {},
                 condition: CONDITION.as_char_ptr(),
                 expected_true: true,
             });
@@ -67,6 +65,7 @@
                     core::ptr::addr_of!(LOCATION.0),
                     $crate::bindings::kunit_assert_type_KUNIT_ASSERTION,
                     core::ptr::addr_of!(ASSERTION.0.assert),
+                    Some($crate::bindings::kunit_unary_assert_format),
                     core::ptr::null(),
                 );
             }

The only tricky bit will be coordinating the changes :)

Daniel