Re: [PATCH 0/9] kunit: Fix printf format specifier issues in KUnit assertions

From: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "David Gow" <davidgow@google.com>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Guenter Roeck" <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	"Rae Moar" <rmoar@google.com>,
	"Matthew Auld" <matthew.auld@intel.com>,
	"Arunpravin Paneer Selvam" <arunpravin.paneerselvam@amd.com>,
	"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
	"Maíra Canal" <mcanal@igalia.com>,
	"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	"Matthew Brost" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
	"Willem de Bruijn" <willemb@google.com>,
	"Florian Westphal" <fw@strlen.de>,
	"Cassio Neri" <cassio.neri@gmail.com>,
	"Javier Martinez Canillas" <javierm@redhat.com>,
	"Arthur Grillo" <arthur.grillo@usp.br>
Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
	Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
	linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] kunit: Fix printf format specifier issues in KUnit assertions
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:23:21 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d0c81ab8-b404-4710-9b27-71aede157b3b@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240221092728.1281499-1-davidgow@google.com>

On 2/21/24 02:27, David Gow wrote:
> KUnit has several macros which accept a log message, which can contain
> printf format specifiers. Some of these (the explicit log macros)
> already use the __printf() gcc attribute to ensure the format specifiers
> are valid, but those which could fail the test, and hence used
> __kunit_do_failed_assertion() behind the scenes, did not.
> 
> These include:
> - KUNIT_EXPECT_*_MSG()
> - KUNIT_ASSERT_*_MSG()
> - KUNIT_FAIL()
> 
> This series adds the __printf() attribute, and fixes all of the issues
> uncovered. (Or, at least, all of those I could find with an x86_64
> allyesconfig, and the default KUnit config on a number of other
> architectures. Please test!)
> 
> The issues in question basically take the following forms:
> - int / long / long long confusion: typically a type being updated, but
>    the format string not.
> - Use of integer format specifiers (%d/%u/%li/etc) for types like size_t
>    or pointer differences (technically ptrdiff_t), which would only work
>    on some architectures.
> - Use of integer format specifiers in combination with PTR_ERR(), where
>    %pe would make more sense.
> - Use of empty messages which, whilst technically not incorrect, are not
>    useful and trigger a gcc warning.
> 
> We'd like to get these (or equivalent) in for 6.9 if possible, so please
> do take a look if possible.
> 
> Thanks,
> -- David
> 
> Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/CAHk-=wgJMOquDO5f8ShH1f4rzZwzApNVCw643m5-Yj+BfsFstA@mail.gmail.com/
> 
>

Thank you for a quick response David. I will apply the series to
kunit next for Linux 6.9 as soon as the reviews are complete.

thanks,
-- Shuah