linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] 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: <f929b8c4-fb66-4724-b2ee-d012a5c20324@collabora.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 14:37:26 +0500
From: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
To: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
 Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>, kernel@...labora.com,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: x86: conform test to TAP format output

This patch brings just readability implements by using kselftests wrappers
instead of manual pass/fail test cases counting. It has been on mailing
list from several months now. Please can someone ack or nack?

On 7/1/24 1:38 PM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> Adding more reviewers. Please review.
> 
> On 5/28/24 10:05 AM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>> Kind reminder
>>
>> On 4/26/24 3:18 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>
>>> ---
>>> Changes since v1:
>>> - No changes, sending it again as got no response on v1 even after weeks
>>> ---
>>>  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