On 11/14/2024 8:25 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 11/12/24 11:28, Amit Vadhavana wrote:
>> - Remove unnecessary `tctx` variable, use `ctx` directly.
>> - Simplified code with no functional changes.
>>
>
> I would rephrase the short to simply say Remove unused variable,
> as refactor implies more extensive changes than what this patch
> is actually doing.
>
> Please write complete sentences instead of bullet points in the
> change log.
>
> How did you find this problem? Do include the details on how
> in the change log.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Amit Vadhavana <av2082000@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c | 7 +++----
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>> b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>> index 66dec47e3ca3..732e89fe99c0 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/lsm/lsm_set_self_attr_test.c
>> @@ -56,16 +56,15 @@ TEST(flags_zero_lsm_set_self_attr)
>> TEST(flags_overset_lsm_set_self_attr)
>> {
>> const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
>> - char *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>> + struct lsm_ctx *ctx = calloc(page_size, 1);
>
> Why not name this tctx and avoid changes to the ASSERT_EQs
> below?
In the realm of linux security modules ctx is short for "context".
I used tctx here because I was lazy. It would be much better to
drop tctx, even if it means a tiny bit more change.
>
>> __u32 size = page_size;
>> - struct lsm_ctx *tctx = (struct lsm_ctx *)ctx;
>> ASSERT_NE(NULL, ctx);
>> if (attr_lsm_count()) {
>> - ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, tctx, &size,
>> + ASSERT_LE(1, lsm_get_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT, ctx, &size,
>> 0));
>> }
>> - ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT |
>> LSM_ATTR_PREV, tctx,
>> + ASSERT_EQ(-1, lsm_set_self_attr(LSM_ATTR_CURRENT |
>> LSM_ATTR_PREV, ctx,
>> size, 0));
>> free(ctx);
>
> You have to change this tctx for sure.
>
> With these changes:
>
> Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Paul, James,
>
> Please do let me know if you would me to take this through
> kselftest tree.
>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
>
>
