Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <2d44632c4067be35491b58b147a4d1329fdfcf16.1645549750.git.andreyknvl@google.com>
 <CANpmjNOnr=B_o83BJ6b1S6FKWe+p2vR58H8CHtGPNPnu6-cQZg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNOnr=B_o83BJ6b1S6FKWe+p2vR58H8CHtGPNPnu6-cQZg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Feb 2022 19:08:27 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+fCnZf2jE1N8j9iQRtOnQsTP=2CQOGYqREbzypPQa-=UXjhDA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mm] another fix for "kasan: improve vmalloc tests"
To:     Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc:     andrey.konovalov@linux.dev,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
        kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

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.