linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] KVM: selftests: Add helper macros for ioctl()s that return file descriptors

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:   Fri, 4 Aug 2023 10:27:07 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] KVM: selftests: Add helper macros for ioctl()s that
 return file descriptors

On Fri, Aug 04, 2023, Oliver Upton wrote:
> Hi Sean,
> 
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 05:42:24PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Add KVM, VM, and vCPU scoped helpers for ioctl()s that return file
> > descriptors, i.e. deduplicate code for asserting success on ioctls() for
> > which a positive return value, not just zero, is considered success.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> 
> I appreciate the desire to eliminate duplicate code, but I think the
> naming just muddies the waters. TBH, when I first read the diff w/o the
> changelog, I thought you were describing the input fd (i.e. 'kvm_fd',
> 'vm_fd', 'vcpu_fd'). I don't think explicitly spelling out the condition
> each time (i.e. ret >= 0) is all that difficult.

Yeah, but it's not just a desire to dedup code, I also am trying to funnel as
many "ioctl() succeeded" asserts as possible into common code so that they naturally
benefit from things like patch 4 (detecting dead/bugged VMs).

I agree the naming sucks.