linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests: x86: conform test to TAP format output

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: <3c3b8d18-7f52-4914-8a1e-8e32b4dd8b20@collabora.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 12:07:13 +0500
From: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
To: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Cc: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>, kernel@...labora.com,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: x86: conform test to TAP format output

Soft reminder

On 3/7/24 11:37 PM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> Conform the layout, informational and status messages to TAP. No
> functional change is intended other than the layout of output messages.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c | 29 +++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c
> index fe99f24341554..f621167424a9c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/x86/vdso_restorer.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>  #include <unistd.h>
>  #include <syscall.h>
>  #include <sys/syscall.h>
> +#include "../kselftest.h"
>  
>  /* Open-code this -- the headers are too messy to easily use them. */
>  struct real_sigaction {
> @@ -44,17 +45,19 @@ static void handler_without_siginfo(int sig)
>  
>  int main()
>  {
> -	int nerrs = 0;
>  	struct real_sigaction sa;
>  
> +	ksft_print_header();
> +	ksft_set_plan(2);
> +
>  	void *vdso = dlopen("linux-vdso.so.1",
>  			    RTLD_LAZY | RTLD_LOCAL | RTLD_NOLOAD);
>  	if (!vdso)
>  		vdso = dlopen("linux-gate.so.1",
>  			      RTLD_LAZY | RTLD_LOCAL | RTLD_NOLOAD);
>  	if (!vdso) {
> -		printf("[SKIP]\tFailed to find vDSO.  Tests are not expected to work.\n");
> -		return 0;
> +		ksft_print_msg("[SKIP]\tFailed to find vDSO. Tests are not expected to work.\n");
> +		return KSFT_SKIP;
>  	}
>  
>  	memset(&sa, 0, sizeof(sa));
> @@ -62,21 +65,16 @@ int main()
>  	sa.flags = SA_SIGINFO;
>  	sa.restorer = NULL;	/* request kernel-provided restorer */
>  
> -	printf("[RUN]\tRaise a signal, SA_SIGINFO, sa.restorer == NULL\n");
> +	ksft_print_msg("Raise a signal, SA_SIGINFO, sa.restorer == NULL\n");
>  
>  	if (syscall(SYS_rt_sigaction, SIGUSR1, &sa, NULL, 8) != 0)
>  		err(1, "raw rt_sigaction syscall");
>  
>  	raise(SIGUSR1);
>  
> -	if (handler_called) {
> -		printf("[OK]\tSA_SIGINFO handler returned successfully\n");
> -	} else {
> -		printf("[FAIL]\tSA_SIGINFO handler was not called\n");
> -		nerrs++;
> -	}
> +	ksft_test_result(handler_called, "SA_SIGINFO handler returned\n");
>  
> -	printf("[RUN]\tRaise a signal, !SA_SIGINFO, sa.restorer == NULL\n");
> +	ksft_print_msg("Raise a signal, !SA_SIGINFO, sa.restorer == NULL\n");
>  
>  	sa.flags = 0;
>  	sa.handler = handler_without_siginfo;
> @@ -86,10 +84,7 @@ int main()
>  
>  	raise(SIGUSR1);
>  
> -	if (handler_called) {
> -		printf("[OK]\t!SA_SIGINFO handler returned successfully\n");
> -	} else {
> -		printf("[FAIL]\t!SA_SIGINFO handler was not called\n");
> -		nerrs++;
> -	}
> +	ksft_test_result(handler_called, "SA_SIGINFO handler returned\n");
> +
> +	ksft_finished();
>  }

-- 
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum