linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 18/24] selftests/resctrl: Introduce generalized test framework

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]

Message-ID: <ffdeb9a9-c066-19c-9898-c2bdf632cef1@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Nov 2023 11:54:59 +0200 (EET)
From:   Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
cc:     linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@...fujitsu.com>,
        Maciej Wieczór-Retman 
        <maciej.wieczor-retman@...el.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/24] selftests/resctrl: Introduce generalized test
 framework

On Thu, 2 Nov 2023, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> On 10/24/2023 2:26 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> ...
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl.h b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl.h
> > index ec6efd36f60a..e017adf1390d 100644
> 
> > @@ -233,25 +183,26 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> >  		case 't':
> >  			token = strtok(optarg, ",");
> >  
> > -			mbm_test = false;
> > -			mba_test = false;
> > -			cmt_test = false;
> > -			cat_test = false;
> > +			if (!test_param_seen) {
> > +				for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(resctrl_tests); i++)
> > +					resctrl_tests[i]->disabled = true;
> > +				tests = 0;
> > +				test_param_seen = true;
> > +			}
> >  			while (token) {
> > -				if (!strncmp(token, MBM_STR, sizeof(MBM_STR))) {
> > -					mbm_test = true;
> > -					tests++;
> > -				} else if (!strncmp(token, MBA_STR, sizeof(MBA_STR))) {
> > -					mba_test = true;
> > -					tests++;
> > -				} else if (!strncmp(token, CMT_STR, sizeof(CMT_STR))) {
> > -					cmt_test = true;
> > -					tests++;
> > -				} else if (!strncmp(token, CAT_STR, sizeof(CAT_STR))) {
> > -					cat_test = true;
> > -					tests++;
> > -				} else {
> > -					printf("invalid argument\n");
> > +				bool found = false;
> > +
> > +				for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(resctrl_tests); i++) {
> > +					if (!strcasecmp(token, resctrl_tests[i]->name)) {
> > +						if (resctrl_tests[i]->disabled)
> > +							tests++;
> > +						resctrl_tests[i]->disabled = false;
> > +						found = true;
> > +					}
> > +				}
> 
> Could providing multiple "-t" result in the test count not
> matching the number of tests run?

bool test_param_seen covers the case with more than one -t parameter.
Because of it, the code above resets tests and ->disabled only when the 
first -t is encountered. tests++ is only done when ->disabled is set from 
true to false.

I don't see how they could get out of sync but if you had a more specific 
case in mind, just let me know.

-- 
 i.