| Message ID | 20210128161721.99150-1-seth.forshee@canonical.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | selftests/seccomp: Accept any valid fd in user_notification_addfd | expand |
On 1/28/21 9:17 AM, Seth Forshee wrote: > This test expects fds to have specific values, which works fine > when the test is run standalone. However, the kselftest runner > consumes a couple of extra fds for redirection when running > tests, so the test fails when run via kselftest. > > Change the test to pass on any valid fd number. > > Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 8 ++------ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c > index 26c72f2b61b1..9338df6f4ca8 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c > @@ -4019,18 +4019,14 @@ TEST(user_notification_addfd) > > /* Verify we can set an arbitrary remote fd */ > fd = ioctl(listener, SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_ADDFD, &addfd); > - /* > - * The child has fds 0(stdin), 1(stdout), 2(stderr), 3(memfd), > - * 4(listener), so the newly allocated fd should be 5. > - */ > - EXPECT_EQ(fd, 5); > + EXPECT_GE(fd, 0); > EXPECT_EQ(filecmp(getpid(), pid, memfd, fd), 0); > > /* Verify we can set an arbitrary remote fd with large size */ > memset(&big, 0x0, sizeof(big)); > big.addfd = addfd; > fd = ioctl(listener, SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_ADDFD_BIG, &big); > - EXPECT_EQ(fd, 6); > + EXPECT_GE(fd, 0); > > /* Verify we can set a specific remote fd */ > addfd.newfd = 42; > Here is my Ack if Kees wants to take it through seccomp. Acked-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> thanks, -- Shuah
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:17:21AM -0600, Seth Forshee wrote: > This test expects fds to have specific values, which works fine > when the test is run standalone. However, the kselftest runner > consumes a couple of extra fds for redirection when running > tests, so the test fails when run via kselftest. > > Change the test to pass on any valid fd number. > > Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com> Thanks! Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> I'll snag this if Shuah doesn't first. :) -Kees > --- > tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 8 ++------ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c > index 26c72f2b61b1..9338df6f4ca8 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c > @@ -4019,18 +4019,14 @@ TEST(user_notification_addfd) > > /* Verify we can set an arbitrary remote fd */ > fd = ioctl(listener, SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_ADDFD, &addfd); > - /* > - * The child has fds 0(stdin), 1(stdout), 2(stderr), 3(memfd), > - * 4(listener), so the newly allocated fd should be 5. > - */ > - EXPECT_EQ(fd, 5); > + EXPECT_GE(fd, 0); > EXPECT_EQ(filecmp(getpid(), pid, memfd, fd), 0); > > /* Verify we can set an arbitrary remote fd with large size */ > memset(&big, 0x0, sizeof(big)); > big.addfd = addfd; > fd = ioctl(listener, SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_ADDFD_BIG, &big); > - EXPECT_EQ(fd, 6); > + EXPECT_GE(fd, 0); > > /* Verify we can set a specific remote fd */ > addfd.newfd = 42; > -- > 2.29.2 >
On 2/9/21 5:33 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:17:21AM -0600, Seth Forshee wrote: >> This test expects fds to have specific values, which works fine >> when the test is run standalone. However, the kselftest runner >> consumes a couple of extra fds for redirection when running >> tests, so the test fails when run via kselftest. >> >> Change the test to pass on any valid fd number. >> >> Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com> > > Thanks! > > Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> > > I'll snag this if Shuah doesn't first. :) > I will apply this. I have several queued for 5.12-rc1 anyway. thanks, -- Shuah
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c index 26c72f2b61b1..9338df6f4ca8 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c @@ -4019,18 +4019,14 @@ TEST(user_notification_addfd) /* Verify we can set an arbitrary remote fd */ fd = ioctl(listener, SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_ADDFD, &addfd); - /* - * The child has fds 0(stdin), 1(stdout), 2(stderr), 3(memfd), - * 4(listener), so the newly allocated fd should be 5. - */ - EXPECT_EQ(fd, 5); + EXPECT_GE(fd, 0); EXPECT_EQ(filecmp(getpid(), pid, memfd, fd), 0); /* Verify we can set an arbitrary remote fd with large size */ memset(&big, 0x0, sizeof(big)); big.addfd = addfd; fd = ioctl(listener, SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_ADDFD_BIG, &big); - EXPECT_EQ(fd, 6); + EXPECT_GE(fd, 0); /* Verify we can set a specific remote fd */ addfd.newfd = 42;
This test expects fds to have specific values, which works fine when the test is run standalone. However, the kselftest runner consumes a couple of extra fds for redirection when running tests, so the test fails when run via kselftest. Change the test to pass on any valid fd number. Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 8 ++------ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)