2023-10-25 19:36:48

by swarup

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] selftests:proc ProtectionKey check in smpas test

Check ProtectionKey field in /proc/*/smaps output,
if system supports page-based memory permissions.

Signed-off-by: Swarup Laxman Kotiaklapudi <[email protected]>
---
tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-empty-vm.c | 38 ++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-empty-vm.c b/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-empty-vm.c
index b16c13688b88..4842f923235c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-empty-vm.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-empty-vm.c
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
#include <unistd.h>
+#include "../kselftest.h"

#ifdef __amd64__
#define TEST_VSYSCALL
@@ -83,10 +84,7 @@ static const char proc_pid_smaps_vsyscall_1[] =
"SwapPss: 0 kB\n"
"Locked: 0 kB\n"
"THPeligible: 0\n"
-/*
- * "ProtectionKey:" field is conditional. It is possible to check it as well,
- * but I don't have such machine.
- */
+"ProtectionKey: 0\n"
;

static const char proc_pid_smaps_vsyscall_2[] =
@@ -113,10 +111,7 @@ static const char proc_pid_smaps_vsyscall_2[] =
"SwapPss: 0 kB\n"
"Locked: 0 kB\n"
"THPeligible: 0\n"
-/*
- * "ProtectionKey:" field is conditional. It is possible to check it as well,
- * but I'm too tired.
- */
+"ProtectionKey: 0\n"
;

static void sigaction_SIGSEGV(int _, siginfo_t *__, void *___)
@@ -241,13 +236,26 @@ static int test_proc_pid_smaps(pid_t pid)
} else {
ssize_t rv = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf));
close(fd);
- if (g_vsyscall == 0) {
- assert(rv == 0);
- } else {
- size_t len = strlen(g_proc_pid_maps_vsyscall);
- /* TODO "ProtectionKey:" */
- assert(rv > len);
- assert(memcmp(buf, g_proc_pid_maps_vsyscall, len) == 0);
+ assert(rv >= 0);
+ assert(rv <= sizeof(buf));
+ if (g_vsyscall != 0) {
+ int pkey = pkey_alloc(0, 0);
+
+ if (pkey < 0) {
+ size_t len = strlen(g_proc_pid_maps_vsyscall);
+
+ assert(rv > len);
+ assert(memcmp(buf, g_proc_pid_maps_vsyscall, len) == 0);
+ } else {
+ pkey_free(pkey);
+ static const char * const S[] = {
+ "ProtectionKey: 0\n"
+ };
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(S); i++)
+ assert(memmem(buf, rv, S[i], strlen(S[i])));
+ }
}
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
--
2.34.1


2023-10-27 10:42:09

by Alexey Dobriyan

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests:proc ProtectionKey check in smpas test

On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 01:06:27AM +0530, Swarup Laxman Kotiaklapudi wrote:
> Check ProtectionKey field in /proc/*/smaps output,
> if system supports page-based memory permissions.

> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-empty-vm.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/proc/proc-empty-vm.c
> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
> #include <sys/types.h>
> #include <sys/wait.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> +#include "../kselftest.h"

I'd rather not include stuff. The reason is that this include makes
the test not (less) self-contained so it requires copying two files
to some machine where it is broken for debugging.

> @@ -83,10 +84,7 @@ static const char proc_pid_smaps_vsyscall_1[] =
> "SwapPss: 0 kB\n"
> "Locked: 0 kB\n"
> "THPeligible: 0\n"
> -/*
> - * "ProtectionKey:" field is conditional. It is possible to check it as well,
> - * but I don't have such machine.
> - */
> +"ProtectionKey: 0\n"
> ;
>
> static const char proc_pid_smaps_vsyscall_2[] =
> @@ -113,10 +111,7 @@ static const char proc_pid_smaps_vsyscall_2[] =
> "SwapPss: 0 kB\n"
> "Locked: 0 kB\n"
> "THPeligible: 0\n"
> -/*
> - * "ProtectionKey:" field is conditional. It is possible to check it as well,
> - * but I'm too tired.
> - */
> +"ProtectionKey: 0\n"
> ;
>
> static void sigaction_SIGSEGV(int _, siginfo_t *__, void *___)
> @@ -241,13 +236,26 @@ static int test_proc_pid_smaps(pid_t pid)
> } else {
> ssize_t rv = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf));
> close(fd);
> - if (g_vsyscall == 0) {
> - assert(rv == 0);
> - } else {
> - size_t len = strlen(g_proc_pid_maps_vsyscall);
> - /* TODO "ProtectionKey:" */
> - assert(rv > len);
> - assert(memcmp(buf, g_proc_pid_maps_vsyscall, len) == 0);
> + assert(rv >= 0);
> + assert(rv <= sizeof(buf));
> + if (g_vsyscall != 0) {
> + int pkey = pkey_alloc(0, 0);

I'd call syscall(). glibc might not have pkey_alloc(3) [[citation needed]]
And I'd move this pkey support testing to the very beginning (like vsyscall).

> + if (pkey < 0) {
> + size_t len = strlen(g_proc_pid_maps_vsyscall);

OK this test was broken, but it is not your fault. See my next patch.

> +
> + assert(rv > len);
> + assert(memcmp(buf, g_proc_pid_maps_vsyscall, len) == 0);
> + } else {
> + pkey_free(pkey);
> + static const char * const S[] = {
> + "ProtectionKey: 0\n"
> + };
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(S); i++)
> + assert(memmem(buf, rv, S[i], strlen(S[i])));
> + }

OK-ish.