Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Wed, 9 Mar 2022 00:24:56 +0300
From:   Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc:     David Gow <davidgow@google.com>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>,
        Magnus =?utf-8?B?R3Jvw58=?= <magnus.gross@rwth-aachen.de>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] binfmt_elf: Introduce KUnit test
Message-ID: <YifJqN+5ju4kHQ2y@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20220304044831.962450-1-keescook@chromium.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220304044831.962450-1-keescook@chromium.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 08:48:31PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> Adds simple KUnit test for some binfmt_elf internals: specifically a
> regression test for the problem fixed by commit 8904d9cd90ee ("ELF:
> fix overflow in total mapping size calculation").

> +	/* No headers, no size. */
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, total_mapping_size(NULL, 0), 0);

This is meaningless test. This whole function only makes sense
if program headers are read and loading process advances far enough
so that pointer is not NULL.

Are we going to mock every single function in the kernel?
Disgusting.