linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] lib/string_kunit: add test case for strnlen

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: <b419c6db-0f3f-4666-8f7c-156f7eda2b5b@kylinos.cn>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 14:53:58 +0800
From: Feng Jiang <jiangfeng@...inos.cn>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: pjw@...nel.org, palmer@...belt.com, aou@...s.berkeley.edu, alex@...ti.fr,
 kees@...nel.org, andy@...nel.org, ebiggers@...nel.org,
 martin.petersen@...cle.com, Jason@...c4.com, conor.dooley@...rochip.com,
 samuel.holland@...ive.com, charlie@...osinc.com, ajones@...tanamicro.com,
 nathan@...nel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
 linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] lib/string_kunit: add test case for strnlen

On 2026/1/7 19:56, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2026 at 4:35 AM Feng Jiang <jiangfeng@...inos.cn> wrote:
>>
>> Add a KUnit test for strnlen() to verify correctness across
>> different string lengths and memory alignments.
> 
> Same comment as per patch 1 (it would probably require to call for
> arch_strnlen() or something like this).

Thanks, makes sense.

I'll add the performance benchmarking (random filling + timing) in V2.

Since string functions are typically exported directly by each architecture
without an arch_ prefix, I'll introduce a generic_strnlen() (based on
lib/string.c) within the test for comparison.

> ...
> 
>> +       for (offset = 0; offset < 16; offset++) {
>> +               for (len = 0; len <= 128; len++) {
> 
> You want to define these two limits to avoid the possible issues in
> the future if the code gets changed.

Got it, will define these limits as macros in V2. Thanks!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Feng Jiang