linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/sgx: Add SGX selftest augment_via_eaccept

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, 17 Aug 2022 17:53:26 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Cc:     "Dhanraj, Vijay" <vijay.dhanraj@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/sgx: Add SGX selftest
 augment_via_eaccept_long

On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 05:44:31PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 09:35:27PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> > >>> This portion below was also copied from previous test and by only
> > >>> testing a write to the first page of the range the purpose is not
> > >>> clear. Could you please elaborate if the intention is to only test
> > >>> accessibility of the first page and why that is sufficient?
> > >>
> > >> It is sufficient because the test reproduces the bug. It would have to be
> > >> rather elaborated why you would possibly want to do more than that.
> > 
> > That is fair. An accurate comment (currently an inaccurate copy&paste) would
> > help to explain this part of the test.
> 
> I would simply add something like:
> 
> /* 
>  * Define memory pool size big enough to trigger the reclaimer in the EAUG
>  * path of the page reclaimer.
>  */
> 
> Suggestions/edits obviously welcome for the comment.

I wonder if we could put .bt files somewhere to make them available. In
root causing this bug bpftrace scripting was the key so it would nice to
have them available along with kselftest.

I could imagine that we end up also in future to bugs allocation so
it would have the script when you clone the kernel tree, and possibly
more scripts in future.

E.g. add bt/alloc-error.bt under tools/testing/selftests/sgx.

BR, Jarkko