netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] selftests/bpf: add remaining ASSERT

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: <CACAyw985JaDmA6n3c_sLDn3Ltwndc_zkNWu84b-cMh2NqjVeNA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Apr 2021 09:05:48 +0100
From:   Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>
Cc:     bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] selftests/bpf: add remaining ASSERT_xxx() variants

On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 at 00:36, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Add ASSERT_TRUE/ASSERT_FALSE for conditions calculated with custom logic to
> true/false. Also add remaining arithmetical assertions:
>   - ASSERT_LE -- less than or equal;
>   - ASSERT_GT -- greater than;
>   - ASSERT_GE -- greater than or equal.
> This should cover most scenarios where people fall back to error-prone
> CHECK()s.
>
> Also extend ASSERT_ERR() to print out errno, in addition to direct error.
>
> Also convert few CHECK() instances to ensure new ASSERT_xxx() variants work as
> expected. Subsequent patch will also use ASSERT_TRUE/ASSERT_FALSE more
> extensively.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>
> ---
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c       |  2 +-
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_endian.c     |  4 +-
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_link.c    |  2 +-
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfree_skb.c      |  2 +-
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/resolve_btfids.c |  7 +--
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/snprintf_btf.c   |  4 +-
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.h      | 50 ++++++++++++++++++-
>  7 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c
> index c60091ee8a21..5e129dc2073c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_dump.c
> @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ static int test_btf_dump_case(int n, struct btf_dump_test_case *t)
>
>         snprintf(out_file, sizeof(out_file), "/tmp/%s.output.XXXXXX", t->file);
>         fd = mkstemp(out_file);
> -       if (CHECK(fd < 0, "create_tmp", "failed to create file: %d\n", fd)) {
> +       if (!ASSERT_GE(fd, 0, "create_tmp")) {

Nit: I would find ASSERT_LE easier to read here. Inverting boolean
conditions is easy to get wrong.

>                 err = fd;
>                 goto done;
>         }
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_endian.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_endian.c
> index 8c52d72c876e..8ab5d3e358dd 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_endian.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf_endian.c
> @@ -6,8 +6,6 @@
>  #include <test_progs.h>
>  #include <bpf/btf.h>
>
> -static int duration = 0;

Good to see this go.

Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>

-- 
Lorenz Bauer  |  Systems Engineer
6th Floor, County Hall/The Riverside Building, SE1 7PB, UK

www.cloudflare.com