Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] KUnit: KASAN Integration

From: Andrey Konovalov
Date: Thu Apr 02 2020 - 12:40:55 EST

Next message: Xiaoyao Li: "Re: [patch v2 1/2] x86,module: Detect VMX modules and disable Split-Lock-Detect"
Previous message: Fangrui Song: "Re: [PATCH v2] Makefile.llvm: simplify LLVM build"
In reply to: Patricia Alfonso: "Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] KUnit: KASAN Integration"
Next in thread: Patricia Alfonso: "[PATCH v3 3/4] KASAN: Port KASAN Tests to KUnit"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 6:37 PM Patricia Alfonso <trishalfonso@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 8:54 AM Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 8:09 PM 'Patricia Alfonso' via kasan-dev
> > <kasan-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Integrate KASAN into KUnit testing framework.
> > > - Fail tests when KASAN reports an error that is not expected
> > > - Use KUNIT_EXPECT_KASAN_FAIL to expect a KASAN error in KASAN tests
> > > - Expected KASAN reports pass tests and are still printed when run
> > > without kunit_tool (kunit_tool still bypasses the report due to the
> > > test passing)
> > > - KUnit struct in current task used to keep track of the current test
> > > from KASAN code
> > >
> > > Make use of "[PATCH v3 kunit-next 1/2] kunit: generalize
> > > kunit_resource API beyond allocated resources" and "[PATCH v3
> > > kunit-next 2/2] kunit: add support for named resources" from Alan
> > > Maguire [1]
> > > - A named resource is added to a test when a KASAN report is
> > > expected
> > > - This resource contains a struct for kasan_data containing
> > > booleans representing if a KASAN report is expected and if a
> > > KASAN report is found
> > >
> > > [1] (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/1583251361-12748-1-git-send-email-alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#t)
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Patricia Alfonso <trishalfonso@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > include/kunit/test.h | 5 +++++
> > > include/linux/kasan.h | 6 ++++++
> > > lib/kunit/test.c | 13 ++++++++-----
> > > lib/test_kasan.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > mm/kasan/report.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 5 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h
> > > index ac59d18e6bab..1dc3d118f64b 100644
> > > --- a/include/kunit/test.h
> > > +++ b/include/kunit/test.h
> > > @@ -225,6 +225,11 @@ struct kunit {
> > > struct list_head resources; /* Protected by lock. */
> > > };
> > >
> > > +static inline void kunit_set_failure(struct kunit *test)
> > > +{
> > > + WRITE_ONCE(test->success, false);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log);
> > >
> > > int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite);
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/kasan.h b/include/linux/kasan.h
> > > index 5cde9e7c2664..148eaef3e003 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/kasan.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/kasan.h
> > > @@ -14,6 +14,12 @@ struct task_struct;
> > > #include <asm/kasan.h>
> > > #include <asm/pgtable.h>
> > >
> > > +/* kasan_data struct is used in KUnit tests for KASAN expected failures */
> > > +struct kunit_kasan_expectation {
> > > + bool report_expected;
> > > + bool report_found;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > extern unsigned char kasan_early_shadow_page[PAGE_SIZE];
> > > extern pte_t kasan_early_shadow_pte[PTRS_PER_PTE];
> > > extern pmd_t kasan_early_shadow_pmd[PTRS_PER_PMD];
> > > diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c
> > > index 2cb7c6220a00..030a3281591e 100644
> > > --- a/lib/kunit/test.c
> > > +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c
> > > @@ -10,16 +10,12 @@
> > > #include <linux/kernel.h>
> > > #include <linux/kref.h>
> > > #include <linux/sched/debug.h>
> > > +#include <linux/sched.h>
> > >
> > > #include "debugfs.h"
> > > #include "string-stream.h"
> > > #include "try-catch-impl.h"
> > >
> > > -static void kunit_set_failure(struct kunit *test)
> > > -{
> > > - WRITE_ONCE(test->success, false);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > > static void kunit_print_tap_version(void)
> > > {
> > > static bool kunit_has_printed_tap_version;
> > > @@ -288,6 +284,10 @@ static void kunit_try_run_case(void *data)
> > > struct kunit_suite *suite = ctx->suite;
> > > struct kunit_case *test_case = ctx->test_case;
> > >
> > > +#if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT))
> > > + current->kunit_test = test;
> > > +#endif /* IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT) */
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * kunit_run_case_internal may encounter a fatal error; if it does,
> > > * abort will be called, this thread will exit, and finally the parent
> > > @@ -603,6 +603,9 @@ void kunit_cleanup(struct kunit *test)
> > > spin_unlock(&test->lock);
> > > kunit_remove_resource(test, res);
> > > }
> > > +#if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT))
> > > + current->kunit_test = NULL;
> > > +#endif /* IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT)*/
> > > }
> > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_cleanup);
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/test_kasan.c b/lib/test_kasan.c
> > > index 3872d250ed2c..cf73c6bee81b 100644
> > > --- a/lib/test_kasan.c
> > > +++ b/lib/test_kasan.c
> > > @@ -23,6 +23,43 @@
> > >
> > > #include <asm/page.h>
> > >
> > > +#include <kunit/test.h>
> > > +
> > > +struct kunit_resource resource;
> > > +struct kunit_kasan_expectation fail_data;
> > > +
> > > +#define KUNIT_SET_KASAN_DATA(test) do { \
> > > + fail_data.report_expected = true; \
> > > + fail_data.report_found = false; \
> > > + kunit_add_named_resource(test, \
> > > + NULL, \
> > > + NULL, \
> > > + &resource, \
> > > + "kasan_data", &fail_data); \
> > > +} while (0)
> > > +
> > > +#define KUNIT_DO_EXPECT_KASAN_FAIL(test, condition) do { \
> > > + struct kunit_resource *resource; \
> > > + struct kunit_kasan_expectation *kasan_data; \
> > > + condition; \
> > > + resource = kunit_find_named_resource(test, "kasan_data"); \
> > > + kasan_data = resource->data; \
> > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, \
> > > + kasan_data->report_expected, \
> > > + kasan_data->report_found); \
> > > + kunit_put_resource(resource); \
> > > +} while (0)
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * KUNIT_EXPECT_KASAN_FAIL() - Causes a test failure when the expression does
> > > + * not cause a KASAN error.
> > > + *
> > > + */
> > > +#define KUNIT_EXPECT_KASAN_FAIL(test, condition) do { \
> > > + KUNIT_SET_KASAN_DATA(test); \
> > > + KUNIT_DO_EXPECT_KASAN_FAIL(test, condition); \
> > > +} while (0)
> >
> > Any reason to split this macro into two parts? Do we call any of them
> > separately?
> >
> They are not called anywhere else... honestly, it was just a style
> choice to make it clear that there are 2 parts to the expectation. I
> don't think they have to be split if there's enough reason to smash
> them together.

I think squashing them together will look cleaner.

>
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Note: test functions are marked noinline so that their names appear in
> > > * reports.
> > > diff --git a/mm/kasan/report.c b/mm/kasan/report.c
> > > index 5ef9f24f566b..87330ef3a99a 100644
> > > --- a/mm/kasan/report.c
> > > +++ b/mm/kasan/report.c
> > > @@ -32,6 +32,8 @@
> > >
> > > #include <asm/sections.h>
> > >
> > > +#include <kunit/test.h>
> > > +
> > > #include "kasan.h"
> > > #include "../slab.h"
> > >
> > > @@ -455,12 +457,38 @@ static bool report_enabled(void)
> > > return !test_and_set_bit(KASAN_BIT_REPORTED, &kasan_flags);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT)
> > > +void kasan_update_kunit_status(struct kunit *cur_test)
> > > +{
> > > + struct kunit_resource *resource;
> > > + struct kunit_kasan_expectation *kasan_data;
> > > +
> > > + if (kunit_find_named_resource(cur_test, "kasan_data")) {
> > > + resource = kunit_find_named_resource(cur_test, "kasan_data");
> > > + kasan_data = resource->data;
> > > + kasan_data->report_found = true;
> > > +
> > > + if (!kasan_data->report_expected)
> > > + kunit_set_failure(current->kunit_test);
> >
> > Hm, we only call KUNIT_SET_KASAN_DATA() for KASAN tests that we expect
> > to fail AFAICS. Then we end up calling kunit_set_failure twice, once
> > here and the other time when we do KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ() in
> > KUNIT_DO_EXPECT_KASAN_FAIL(). Or maybe there's something I
> > misunderstand.
> >
>
> You are right. I didn't realize, but yes. If the report_expected is
> false, KUNIT_DO_EXPECT_KASAN_FAIL() will set the test failure in
> KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(). I think this is just leftover logic from before I
> thought to use KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ().
>
> > > + else
> > > + return;
> >
> > Nit: "else return;" can be dropped.
> >
> > You can actually reorder the code a bit to make it easier to read:
> >
> > if (!kunit_find_named_resource(cur_test, "kasan_data")) {
> > kunit_set_failure(current->kunit_test);
> > return;
> > }
> > // here comes kasan tests checks
> >
>
> I agree. This looks much cleaner. The thing to note is that anyone can
> add a named resource to a test. I doubt anyone will name their
> resource "kasan_data" outside of this file, but it may be worth adding
> a comment advising against it.
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > + } else
> > > + kunit_set_failure(current->kunit_test);
> > > +}
> > > +#endif /* IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT) */
> > > +
> > > void kasan_report_invalid_free(void *object, unsigned long ip)
> > > {
> > > unsigned long flags;
> > > u8 tag = get_tag(object);
> > >
> > > object = reset_tag(object);
> > > +
> > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT)
> > > + if (current->kunit_test)
> > > + kasan_update_kunit_status(current->kunit_test);
> > > +#endif /* IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT) */
> > > +
> > > start_report(&flags);
> > > pr_err("BUG: KASAN: double-free or invalid-free in %pS\n", (void *)ip);
> > > print_tags(tag, object);
> > > @@ -481,6 +509,11 @@ void __kasan_report(unsigned long addr, size_t size, bool is_write, unsigned lon
> > > if (likely(!report_enabled()))
> > > return;
> > >
> > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT)
> > > + if (current->kunit_test)
> > > + kasan_update_kunit_status(current->kunit_test);
> > > +#endif /* IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT) */
> > > +
> > > disable_trace_on_warning();
> > >
> > > tagged_addr = (void *)addr;
> > > --
>
> Thanks for the comments!
>
> Best,
> Patricia

Next message: Xiaoyao Li: "Re: [patch v2 1/2] x86,module: Detect VMX modules and disable Split-Lock-Detect"
Previous message: Fangrui Song: "Re: [PATCH v2] Makefile.llvm: simplify LLVM build"
In reply to: Patricia Alfonso: "Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] KUnit: KASAN Integration"
Next in thread: Patricia Alfonso: "[PATCH v3 3/4] KASAN: Port KASAN Tests to KUnit"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]