| Message ID | 2d44632c4067be35491b58b147a4d1329fdfcf16.1645549750.git.andreyknvl@google.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [mm] another fix for "kasan: improve vmalloc tests" | expand |
On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 at 18:10, <andrey.konovalov@linux.dev> wrote: > > From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> > > set_memory_rw/ro() are not exported to be used in modules and thus > cannot be used in KUnit-compatible KASAN tests. > > Drop the checks that rely on these functions. > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> > --- > lib/test_kasan.c | 6 ------ > 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c > index ef99d81fe8b3..448194bbc41d 100644 > --- a/lib/test_kasan.c > +++ b/lib/test_kasan.c > @@ -1083,12 +1083,6 @@ static void vmalloc_helpers_tags(struct kunit *test) > KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, is_vmalloc_addr(ptr)); > KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, vmalloc_to_page(ptr)); > > - /* Make sure vmalloc'ed memory permissions can be changed. */ > - rv = set_memory_ro((unsigned long)ptr, 1); > - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); > - rv = set_memory_rw((unsigned long)ptr, 1); > - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); You can still test it by checking 'ifdef MODULE'. You could add a separate test which is skipped if MODULE is defined. Does that work?
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 6:50 PM Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 at 18:10, <andrey.konovalov@linux.dev> wrote: > > > > From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> > > > > set_memory_rw/ro() are not exported to be used in modules and thus > > cannot be used in KUnit-compatible KASAN tests. > > > > Drop the checks that rely on these functions. > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> > > --- > > lib/test_kasan.c | 6 ------ > > 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c > > index ef99d81fe8b3..448194bbc41d 100644 > > --- a/lib/test_kasan.c > > +++ b/lib/test_kasan.c > > @@ -1083,12 +1083,6 @@ static void vmalloc_helpers_tags(struct kunit *test) > > KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, is_vmalloc_addr(ptr)); > > KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, vmalloc_to_page(ptr)); > > > > - /* Make sure vmalloc'ed memory permissions can be changed. */ > > - rv = set_memory_ro((unsigned long)ptr, 1); > > - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); > > - rv = set_memory_rw((unsigned long)ptr, 1); > > - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); > > You can still test it by checking 'ifdef MODULE'. You could add a > separate test which is skipped if MODULE is defined. Does that work? Yes, putting it under ifdef will work. I thought that having a discrepancy between built-in and module tests is weird, but I see the kprobes tests doing this, so maybe it's not such a bad idea. Will do in v2.
On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 at 19:08, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 6:50 PM Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 at 18:10, <andrey.konovalov@linux.dev> wrote: > > > > > > From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> > > > > > > set_memory_rw/ro() are not exported to be used in modules and thus > > > cannot be used in KUnit-compatible KASAN tests. > > > > > > Drop the checks that rely on these functions. > > > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> > > > --- > > > lib/test_kasan.c | 6 ------ > > > 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c > > > index ef99d81fe8b3..448194bbc41d 100644 > > > --- a/lib/test_kasan.c > > > +++ b/lib/test_kasan.c > > > @@ -1083,12 +1083,6 @@ static void vmalloc_helpers_tags(struct kunit *test) > > > KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, is_vmalloc_addr(ptr)); > > > KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, vmalloc_to_page(ptr)); > > > > > > - /* Make sure vmalloc'ed memory permissions can be changed. */ > > > - rv = set_memory_ro((unsigned long)ptr, 1); > > > - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); > > > - rv = set_memory_rw((unsigned long)ptr, 1); > > > - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); > > > > You can still test it by checking 'ifdef MODULE'. You could add a > > separate test which is skipped if MODULE is defined. Does that work? > > Yes, putting it under ifdef will work. I thought that having a > discrepancy between built-in and module tests is weird, but I see the > kprobes tests doing this, so maybe it's not such a bad idea. Will do > in v2. Additionally you could have the test skip with kunit_skip(), so it's at least visible. The code itself has to be #ifdef'd I guess because set_memory_*() aren't even declared ifdef MODULE (I think?).
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 7:11 PM Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 at 19:08, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 6:50 PM Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 at 18:10, <andrey.konovalov@linux.dev> wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> > > > > > > > > set_memory_rw/ro() are not exported to be used in modules and thus > > > > cannot be used in KUnit-compatible KASAN tests. > > > > > > > > Drop the checks that rely on these functions. > > > > > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com> > > > > --- > > > > lib/test_kasan.c | 6 ------ > > > > 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c > > > > index ef99d81fe8b3..448194bbc41d 100644 > > > > --- a/lib/test_kasan.c > > > > +++ b/lib/test_kasan.c > > > > @@ -1083,12 +1083,6 @@ static void vmalloc_helpers_tags(struct kunit *test) > > > > KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, is_vmalloc_addr(ptr)); > > > > KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, vmalloc_to_page(ptr)); > > > > > > > > - /* Make sure vmalloc'ed memory permissions can be changed. */ > > > > - rv = set_memory_ro((unsigned long)ptr, 1); > > > > - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); > > > > - rv = set_memory_rw((unsigned long)ptr, 1); > > > > - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); > > > > > > You can still test it by checking 'ifdef MODULE'. You could add a > > > separate test which is skipped if MODULE is defined. Does that work? > > > > Yes, putting it under ifdef will work. I thought that having a > > discrepancy between built-in and module tests is weird, but I see the > > kprobes tests doing this, so maybe it's not such a bad idea. Will do > > in v2. > > Additionally you could have the test skip with kunit_skip(), so it's > at least visible. The code itself has to be #ifdef'd I guess because > set_memory_*() aren't even declared ifdef MODULE (I think?). I sent v2 with the simplest approach without an additional test. I hope that's OK with you.
diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c index ef99d81fe8b3..448194bbc41d 100644 --- a/lib/test_kasan.c +++ b/lib/test_kasan.c @@ -1083,12 +1083,6 @@ static void vmalloc_helpers_tags(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, is_vmalloc_addr(ptr)); KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, vmalloc_to_page(ptr)); - /* Make sure vmalloc'ed memory permissions can be changed. */ - rv = set_memory_ro((unsigned long)ptr, 1); - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); - rv = set_memory_rw((unsigned long)ptr, 1); - KUNIT_ASSERT_GE(test, rv, 0); - vfree(ptr); }