linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kasan: Enable KUnit integration whenever CONFIG

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, 19 Oct 2022 21:48:42 +0200
From:   Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>
To:     David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc:     Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kasan: Enable KUnit integration whenever CONFIG_KUNIT is enabled

On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 5:06 PM David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > How does KUnit detect a KASAN failure for other tests than the KASAN
> > ones? I thought this was only implemented for KASAN tests. At least, I
> > don't see any code querying kunit_kasan_status outside of KASAN tests.
>
> Yeah, there aren't any other tests which set up a "kasan_status"
> resource to expect specific failures, but we still want the fallback
> call to kunit_set_failure() so that any test which causes a KASAN
> report will fail:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/mm/kasan/report.c#n130

Ah, right. Thanks for the explanation!

> > I'm currently switching KASAN tests from using KUnit resources to
> > console tracepoints [1], and those patches will be in conflict with
> > yours.
>
> Ah, sorry -- I'd seen these go past, and totally forgot about them! I
> think all we really want to keep is the ability to fail tests if a
> KASAN report occurs. The tricky bit is then disabling that for the
> KASAN tests, so that they can have "expected" failures.

I wonder what's the best solution to support this, assuming KASAN
tests are switched to using tracepoints... I guess we could still keep
the per-task KUnit flag, and only use it for non-KASAN tests. However,
they will still suffer from the same issue tracepoints solve for KASAN
tests: if a bug is triggered in a context other than the current task,
the test will succeed.