netdev - Re: [bpf-next 1/2] samples: bpf: Fix tracex7 error raised on the missing argument

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: <CAEf4Bzb-9TKKdL4x4UYw8T925pASYjt3+29+0xXq-reNG3qy8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Jul 2021 13:08:43 -0700
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Juhee Kang <claudiajkang@...il.com>
Cc:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [bpf-next 1/2] samples: bpf: Fix tracex7 error raised on the
 missing argument

On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 8:21 AM Juhee Kang <claudiajkang@...il.com> wrote:
>
> The current behavior of 'tracex7' doesn't consist with other bpf samples
> tracex{1..6}. Other samples do not require any argument to run with, but
> tracex7 should be run with btrfs device argument. (it should be executed
> with test_override_return.sh)
>
> Currently, tracex7 doesn't have any description about how to run this
> program and raises an unexpected error. And this result might be
> confusing since users might not have a hunch about how to run this
> program.
>
>     // Current behavior
>     # ./tracex7
>     sh: 1: Syntax error: word unexpected (expecting ")")
>     // Fixed behavior
>     # ./tracex7
>     ERROR: Run with the btrfs device argument!
>
> In order to fix this error, this commit adds logic to report a message
> and exit when running this program with a missing argument.
>
> Additionally in test_override_return.sh, there is a problem with
> multiple directory(tmpmnt) creation. So in this commit adds a line with
> removing the directory with every execution.
>
> Signed-off-by: Juhee Kang <claudiajkang@...il.com>
> ---
>  samples/bpf/test_override_return.sh | 1 +
>  samples/bpf/tracex7_user.c          | 5 +++++
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/samples/bpf/test_override_return.sh b/samples/bpf/test_override_return.sh
> index e68b9ee6814b..6480b55502c7 100755
> --- a/samples/bpf/test_override_return.sh
> +++ b/samples/bpf/test_override_return.sh
> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
>  #!/bin/bash
>
> +rm -rf tmpmnt

Do we need -rf or -r would do?

>  rm -f testfile.img
>  dd if=/dev/zero of=testfile.img bs=1M seek=1000 count=1
>  DEVICE=$(losetup --show -f testfile.img)
> diff --git a/samples/bpf/tracex7_user.c b/samples/bpf/tracex7_user.c
> index fdcd6580dd73..8be7ce18d3ba 100644
> --- a/samples/bpf/tracex7_user.c
> +++ b/samples/bpf/tracex7_user.c
> @@ -14,6 +14,11 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>         int ret = 0;
>         FILE *f;
>
> +       if (!argv[1]) {
> +               fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: Run with the btrfs device argument!\n");
> +               return 0;
> +       }
> +
>         snprintf(filename, sizeof(filename), "%s_kern.o", argv[0]);
>         obj = bpf_object__open_file(filename, NULL);
>         if (libbpf_get_error(obj)) {
> --
> 2.27.0
>