| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20240122-b4-kselftest-seccomp-benchmark-ktap-v2-2-aed137eaea41@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 16:04:16 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] kselftest/seccomp: Report each expectation we
assert as a KTAP test
The seccomp benchmark test makes a number of checks on the performance it
measures and logs them to the output but does so in a custom format which
none of the automated test runners understand meaning that the chances that
anyone is paying attention are slim. Let's additionally log each result in
KTAP format so that automated systems parsing the test output will see each
comparison as a test case. The original logs are left in place since they
provide the actual numbers for analysis.
As part of this rework the flow for the main program so that when we skip
tests we still log all the tests we skip, this is because the standard KTAP
headers and footers include counts of the number of expected and run tests.
Tested-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
---
.../testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_benchmark.c | 62 +++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_benchmark.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_benchmark.c
index 93168dd2c1e3..436a527b8235 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_benchmark.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_benchmark.c
@@ -98,24 +98,36 @@ bool le(int i_one, int i_two)
}
long compare(const char *name_one, const char *name_eval, const char *name_two,
- unsigned long long one, bool (*eval)(int, int), unsigned long long two)
+ unsigned long long one, bool (*eval)(int, int), unsigned long long two,
+ bool skip)
{
bool good;
+ if (skip) {
+ ksft_test_result_skip("%s %s %s\n", name_one, name_eval,
+ name_two);
+ return 0;
+ }
+
ksft_print_msg("\t%s %s %s (%lld %s %lld): ", name_one, name_eval, name_two,
(long long)one, name_eval, (long long)two);
if (one > INT_MAX) {
ksft_print_msg("Miscalculation! Measurement went negative: %lld\n", (long long)one);
- return 1;
+ good = false;
+ goto out;
}
if (two > INT_MAX) {
ksft_print_msg("Miscalculation! Measurement went negative: %lld\n", (long long)two);
- return 1;
+ good = false;
+ goto out;
}
good = eval(one, two);
printf("%s\n", good ? "✔️" : "❌");
+out:
+ ksft_test_result(good, "%s %s %s\n", name_one, name_eval, name_two);
+
return good ? 0 : 1;
}
@@ -142,9 +154,13 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
unsigned long long samples, calc;
unsigned long long native, filter1, filter2, bitmap1, bitmap2;
unsigned long long entry, per_filter1, per_filter2;
+ bool skip = false;
setbuf(stdout, NULL);
+ ksft_print_header();
+ ksft_set_plan(7);
+
ksft_print_msg("Running on:\n");
ksft_print_msg("");
system("uname -a");
@@ -202,8 +218,10 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
#define ESTIMATE(fmt, var, what) do { \
var = (what); \
ksft_print_msg("Estimated " fmt ": %llu ns\n", var); \
- if (var > INT_MAX) \
- goto more_samples; \
+ if (var > INT_MAX) { \
+ skip = true; \
+ ret |= 1; \
+ } \
} while (0)
ESTIMATE("total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter", calc,
@@ -222,30 +240,34 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
(filter2 - native - entry) / 4);
ksft_print_msg("Expectations:\n");
- ret |= compare("native", "≤", "1 bitmap", native, le, bitmap1);
- bits = compare("native", "≤", "1 filter", native, le, filter1);
+ ret |= compare("native", "≤", "1 bitmap", native, le, bitmap1,
+ skip);
+ bits = compare("native", "≤", "1 filter", native, le, filter1,
+ skip);
if (bits)
- goto more_samples;
+ skip = true;
ret |= compare("per-filter (last 2 diff)", "≈", "per-filter (filters / 4)",
- per_filter1, approx, per_filter2);
+ per_filter1, approx, per_filter2, skip);
bits = compare("1 bitmapped", "≈", "2 bitmapped",
- bitmap1 - native, approx, bitmap2 - native);
+ bitmap1 - native, approx, bitmap2 - native, skip);
if (bits) {
ksft_print_msg("Skipping constant action bitmap expectations: they appear unsupported.\n");
- goto out;
+ skip = true;
}
- ret |= compare("entry", "≈", "1 bitmapped", entry, approx, bitmap1 - native);
- ret |= compare("entry", "≈", "2 bitmapped", entry, approx, bitmap2 - native);
+ ret |= compare("entry", "≈", "1 bitmapped", entry, approx,
+ bitmap1 - native, skip);
+ ret |= compare("entry", "≈", "2 bitmapped", entry, approx,
+ bitmap2 - native, skip);
ret |= compare("native + entry + (per filter * 4)", "≈", "4 filters total",
- entry + (per_filter1 * 4) + native, approx, filter2);
- if (ret == 0)
- goto out;
+ entry + (per_filter1 * 4) + native, approx, filter2,
+ skip);
-more_samples:
- ksft_print_msg("Saw unexpected benchmark result. Try running again with more samples?\n");
-out:
- return 0;
+ if (ret) {
+ ksft_print_msg("Saw unexpected benchmark result. Try running again with more samples?\n");
+ }
+
+ ksft_finished();
}
--
2.30.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists