netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: remove asserts from subtests

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]

Date:   Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:52:51 -0700
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
Cc:     Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: remove asserts
 from subtests

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 9:48 AM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Otherwise they can bring the whole process down.
>
> Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
> ---

This is probably why you added all that extra logging in __test__fail(), right?

So had a low-priority TODO item to add another CHECK()-like macro that
would only report failure (but won't bump/log success). Seems like
this is something that would be useful for these asserts?

What do you think about either QCHECK() (for "quiet" check) or surely
we can also do ASSERT (but it's less obvious that it won't log success
and it's also not obvious that it won't actually terminate test
immediately).

Then inside that QCHECK() you can log file:line number, similar to
CHECK(), but only for failure case.

Thoughts?