Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v1] apparmor: add AppArmor KUnit tests for policy unpack

From: Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@google.com>
To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Cc: shuah <shuah@kernel.org>,
	john.johansen@canonical.com, jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com,
	keescook@chromium.org, alan.maguire@oracle.com,
	davidgow@google.com, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	KUnit Development <kunit-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mike Salvatore <mike.salvatore@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v1] apparmor: add AppArmor KUnit tests for policy unpack
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 17:33:56 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAXuY3rLEt9nqOBSNaWjLMHNg6pDHdjtg7hFiYx-KCDhyfnkcg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191018001816.94460-1-brendanhiggins@google.com>

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 5:19 PM Brendan Higgins
<brendanhiggins@google.com> wrote:

> +config SECURITY_APPARMOR_TEST
> +       bool "Build KUnit tests for policy_unpack.c"
> +       default n
> +       depends on KUNIT && SECURITY_APPARMOR
> +       help
>
select SECURITY_APPARMOR ?
> +       KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, size, TEST_BLOB_DATA_SIZE);
> +       KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test,
> +               memcmp(blob, TEST_BLOB_DATA, TEST_BLOB_DATA_SIZE) == 0);
I think this must be  KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, size, TEST_BLOB_DATA_SIZE);,
otherwise there could be a buffer overflow in memcmp. All tests that
follow such pattern
are suspect. Also, not sure about your stylistic preference for
KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test,
               memcmp(blob, TEST_BLOB_DATA, TEST_BLOB_DATA_SIZE) == 0);
vs
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test,
               0,
               memcmp(blob, TEST_BLOB_DATA, TEST_BLOB_DATA_SIZE));