Messages in this thread | | | From | Kees Cook <> | Date | Tue, 18 Apr 2017 17:02:57 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v6 09/11] seccomp: Enhance test_harness with an assert step mechanism |
| |
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> wrote: > This is useful to return an information about the error without being > able to write to TH_LOG_STREAM. > > Helpers from test_harness.h may be useful outside of the seccomp > directory. > > Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> > Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> > Cc: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h | 8 +++++++- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h > index a786c69c7584..77e407663e06 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/test_harness.h > @@ -397,7 +397,7 @@ struct __test_metadata { > const char *name; > void (*fn)(struct __test_metadata *); > int termsig; > - int passed; > + __s8 passed;
Why the reduction here? int is signed too?
> int trigger; /* extra handler after the evaluation */ > struct __test_metadata *prev, *next; > }; > @@ -476,6 +476,12 @@ void __run_test(struct __test_metadata *t) > "instead of by signal (code: %d)\n", > t->name, > WEXITSTATUS(status)); > + } else if (t->passed < 0) { > + fprintf(TH_LOG_STREAM, > + "%s: Failed at step #%d\n", > + t->name, > + t->passed * -1); > + t->passed = 0; > }
Instead of creating an overloaded mechanism here, perhaps have an option reporting mechanism that can be enabled. Like adding to __test_metadata "bool no_stream; int test_number;" and adding test_number++ to each ASSERT/EXCEPT call, and doing something like:
if (t->no_stream) { fprintf(TH_LOG_STREAM, "%s: Failed at step #%d\n", t->name, t->test_number); }
It'd be a cleaner approach, maybe?
-Kees
-- Kees Cook Pixel Security
| |