netdev - Re: [PATCH 4/6] test_bpf: add module parameters to filter the tests to run.

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: <55BF9590.4080205@freebox.fr>
Date:	Mon, 03 Aug 2015 18:23:44 +0200
From:	Nicolas Schichan <nschichan@...ebox.fr>
To:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] test_bpf: add module parameters to filter the tests
 to run.

On 08/03/2015 05:58 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 08/03/2015 04:02 PM, Nicolas Schichan wrote:
>> When developping on the interpreter or a particular JIT, it can be
>> insteresting to restrict the test list to a specific test or a
> 
> s/insteresting/interesting/
[...]
> s/test_pbf/test_bpf/
[...]
> s/test_pbf/test_bpf/
[...]
> s/conver/cover/

Sorry for the various typos, I'll fix that in a V2.

>> +         */
>> +        if (test_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(tests)) {
>> +            pr_err("test_bpf: invalid test_id specified.\n");
>> +            return -EINVAL;
>> +        }
> [...]
>> @@ -4893,6 +4955,14 @@ static __init void destroy_bpf_tests(void)
>>       }
>>   }
>>
>> +static bool exclude_test(int test_id)
>> +{
>> +    if (test_range[0] >= 0 &&
>> +        (test_id < test_range[0] || test_id > test_range[1]))
>> +        return true;
>> +    return false;
> 
> Minor nit: could directly return it, f.e.:
> 
>     return test_range[0] >= 0 && (test_id < test_range[0] ||
>                                       test_id > test_range[1]);

I will change that.

> Btw, for the range test in prepare_bpf_tests(), you could also reject
> a negative lower bound index right there.

I thought it was better to have all the sanity checks grouped in
prepare_bpf_tests() (with the checking of the test_name and test_id parameters
nearby) ? Also a negative lower bound is meaning that no range has been set so
all tests should be run.

Thanks,

-- 
Nicolas Schichan
Freebox SAS
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html