Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] selftests/mseal: add more tests for mmap

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 03:50:00PM -0700, Jeff Xu wrote:

> Even though the number of lines is large in these patches, its main
> intention is to test Pedro's in-place change (from can_modify_mm to
> can_modify_vma). Before this patch,  the test had a common pattern:
> setup memory layout, seal the memory, perform a few mm-api steps, verify
> return code (not zero).  Because of the nature of out-of-loop,  it is
> sufficient to just verify the error code in a few cases.

> With Pedro's in-loop change, the sealing check happens later in the
> stack, thus there are more things and scenarios to verify. And there were
> feedback to me during in-loop change that selftest should be extensive
> enough to discover all regressions.  Even though this viewpoint is subject
> to debate. Since none would want to do it, I thought I would just do it.

> So the Patch V3 1/5 is dedicated entirely to increasing the verification
> for existing scenarios, this including checking return code code, vma-size,
> etc after mm api return.

> Patch V3 3/5 are for unmap(), during review of V2 of Pedro's in-loop
> change, we discovered a bug in unmap(), and unmap() is not atomic.
> This leads to 4/5(mmap), 5/5(mremap), which calls munmap().
> In addition, I add scenarios to cover cross-multiple-vma cases.

> The  high-level goal of mseal test are two folds:
> 1> make sure sealing is working correctly under different scenarios,
> i.e. sealed mapping are not modified.
> 2> For unsealed memory, added mseal code  doesn't regress on regular mm API.

> The goal 2 is as important as 1, that is why tests usually are done in
> two phases, one with sealing, the other without.

That's vastly more detail than is in the changelogs for the actual
patches (which are just a few lines each) or the cover letter of the
series.  I don't have the MM knowledge to assess the detail of what
you're saying but I can't help but think that it'd help a lot with
review if all this detail were part of the actual submission.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux