[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABVgOSn1Lrkp96tucPniwPkVbpsBvTRZey=mCVDw7xS+Jro_AA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 15:44:01 +0800
From: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
To: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>, Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Rae Moar <rmoar@...gle.com>, Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com>,
Diego Vieira <diego.daniel.professional@...il.com>, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
llvm@...ts.linux.dev, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <linux@...blig.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
WangYuli <wangyuli@...ontech.com>, Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
Günther Noack <gnoack@...gle.com>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] lib/tests: Add randstruct KUnit test
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 at 09:38, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Perform basic validation about layout randomization and initialization
> tracking when using CONFIG_RANDSTRUCT=y. Tested using:
>
> $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run \
> --kconfig_add CONFIG_RANDSTRUCT_FULL=y \
> randstruct
> [17:22:30] ================= randstruct (2 subtests) ==================
> [17:22:30] [PASSED] randstruct_layout
> [17:22:30] [PASSED] randstruct_initializers
> [17:22:30] =================== [PASSED] randstruct ====================
> [17:22:30] ============================================================
> [17:22:30] Testing complete. Ran 2 tests: passed: 2
> [17:22:30] Elapsed time: 5.091s total, 0.001s configuring, 4.974s building, 0.086s running
>
> Adding "--make_option LLVM=1" can be used to test Clang, which also
> passes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
> ---
This works here for me. I'm a little wary of the prospect of the
"unlucky or broken" message making the test fail if we're just
unlucky, but it seems unlikely enough that we can deal with it later
if it ever becomes a problem.
Acked-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cheers,
-- David
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5281 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists