linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 7/7] selftests/ftrace: add test cases for VFS type "%pd" and "%pD"

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: <20240124103201.6dd8d466b1b734796418c1c4@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 10:32:01 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Ye Bin <yebin10@...wei.com>
Cc: <rostedt@...dmis.org>, <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 7/7] selftests/ftrace: add test cases for VFS type
 "%pd" and "%pD"

On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 17:21:39 +0800
Ye Bin <yebin10@...wei.com> wrote:

> This patch adds test cases for new print format type "%pd/%pD".The test cases
> test the following items:
> 1. Test README if add "%pd/%pD" type;
> 2. Test "%pd" type for dput();
> 3. Test "%pD" type for vfs_read();
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ye Bin <yebin10@...wei.com>
> ---
>  .../ftrace/test.d/kprobe/kprobe_args_vfs.tc   | 79 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 79 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/kprobe/kprobe_args_vfs.tc
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/kprobe/kprobe_args_vfs.tc b/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/kprobe/kprobe_args_vfs.tc
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..1d8edd294dd6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/test.d/kprobe/kprobe_args_vfs.tc
> @@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
> +#!/bin/sh
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +# description: Kprobe event VFS type argument
> +# requires: kprobe_events
> +
> +case `uname -m` in
> +x86_64)
> +  ARG1=%di
> +;;
> +i[3456]86)
> +  ARG1=%ax
> +;;
> +aarch64)
> +  ARG1=%x0
> +;;
> +arm*)
> +  ARG1=%r0
> +;;
> +ppc64*)
> +  ARG1=%r3
> +;;
> +ppc*)
> +  ARG1=%r3

You can merge this ppc* and ppc64* cases :)

> +;;
> +s390*)
> +  ARG1=%r2
> +;;
> +mips*)
> +  ARG1=%r4
> +;;
> +loongarch*)
> +  ARG1=%r4
> +;;
> +riscv*)
> +  ARG1=%a0

Anyway, I wonder why don't you use '$arg1' instead of these registers.
Is there any reason?

Thank you,

> +;;
> +*)
> +  echo "Please implement other architecture here"
> +  exit_untested
> +esac
> +
> +: "Test argument %pd/%pD in README"
> +grep -q "%pd/%pD" README
> +
> +: "Test argument %pd with name"
> +echo "p:testprobe dput name=${ARG1}:%pd" > kprobe_events
> +echo 1 > events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +grep -q "1" events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +echo 0 > events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +grep "dput" trace | grep -q "enable"
> +echo "" > kprobe_events
> +echo "" > trace
> +
> +: "Test argument %pd without name"
> +echo "p:testprobe dput ${ARG1}:%pd" > kprobe_events
> +echo 1 > events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +grep -q "1" events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +echo 0 > events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +grep "dput" trace | grep -q "enable"
> +echo "" > kprobe_events
> +echo "" > trace
> +
> +: "Test argument %pD with name"
> +echo "p:testprobe vfs_read name=${ARG1}:%pD" > kprobe_events
> +echo 1 > events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +grep -q "1" events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +echo 0 > events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +grep "vfs_read" trace | grep -q "enable"
> +echo "" > kprobe_events
> +echo "" > trace
> +
> +: "Test argument %pD without name"
> +echo "p:testprobe vfs_read ${ARG1}:%pD" > kprobe_events
> +echo 1 > events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +grep -q "1"  events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +echo 0 > events/kprobes/testprobe/enable
> +grep "vfs_read" trace | grep -q "enable"
> +echo "" > kprobe_events
> +echo "" > trace
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>