cachepc-linux

Fork of AMDESE/linux with modifications for CachePC side-channel attack
git clone https://git.sinitax.com/sinitax/cachepc-linux
Log | Files | Refs | README | LICENSE | sfeed.txt

sysctl-test.c (10918B)


      1// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
      2/*
      3 * KUnit test of proc sysctl.
      4 */
      5
      6#include <kunit/test.h>
      7#include <linux/sysctl.h>
      8
      9#define KUNIT_PROC_READ 0
     10#define KUNIT_PROC_WRITE 1
     11
     12static int i_zero;
     13static int i_one_hundred = 100;
     14
     15/*
     16 * Test that proc_dointvec will not try to use a NULL .data field even when the
     17 * length is non-zero.
     18 */
     19static void sysctl_test_api_dointvec_null_tbl_data(struct kunit *test)
     20{
     21	struct ctl_table null_data_table = {
     22		.procname = "foo",
     23		/*
     24		 * Here we are testing that proc_dointvec behaves correctly when
     25		 * we give it a NULL .data field. Normally this would point to a
     26		 * piece of memory where the value would be stored.
     27		 */
     28		.data		= NULL,
     29		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
     30		.mode		= 0644,
     31		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
     32		.extra1		= &i_zero,
     33		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
     34	};
     35	/*
     36	 * proc_dointvec expects a buffer in user space, so we allocate one. We
     37	 * also need to cast it to __user so sparse doesn't get mad.
     38	 */
     39	void __user *buffer = (void __user *)kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(int),
     40							   GFP_USER);
     41	size_t len;
     42	loff_t pos;
     43
     44	/*
     45	 * We don't care what the starting length is since proc_dointvec should
     46	 * not try to read because .data is NULL.
     47	 */
     48	len = 1234;
     49	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&null_data_table,
     50					       KUNIT_PROC_READ, buffer, &len,
     51					       &pos));
     52	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, len);
     53
     54	/*
     55	 * See above.
     56	 */
     57	len = 1234;
     58	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&null_data_table,
     59					       KUNIT_PROC_WRITE, buffer, &len,
     60					       &pos));
     61	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, len);
     62}
     63
     64/*
     65 * Similar to the previous test, we create a struct ctrl_table that has a .data
     66 * field that proc_dointvec cannot do anything with; however, this time it is
     67 * because we tell proc_dointvec that the size is 0.
     68 */
     69static void sysctl_test_api_dointvec_table_maxlen_unset(struct kunit *test)
     70{
     71	int data = 0;
     72	struct ctl_table data_maxlen_unset_table = {
     73		.procname = "foo",
     74		.data		= &data,
     75		/*
     76		 * So .data is no longer NULL, but we tell proc_dointvec its
     77		 * length is 0, so it still shouldn't try to use it.
     78		 */
     79		.maxlen		= 0,
     80		.mode		= 0644,
     81		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
     82		.extra1		= &i_zero,
     83		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
     84	};
     85	void __user *buffer = (void __user *)kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(int),
     86							   GFP_USER);
     87	size_t len;
     88	loff_t pos;
     89
     90	/*
     91	 * As before, we don't care what buffer length is because proc_dointvec
     92	 * cannot do anything because its internal .data buffer has zero length.
     93	 */
     94	len = 1234;
     95	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&data_maxlen_unset_table,
     96					       KUNIT_PROC_READ, buffer, &len,
     97					       &pos));
     98	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, len);
     99
    100	/*
    101	 * See previous comment.
    102	 */
    103	len = 1234;
    104	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&data_maxlen_unset_table,
    105					       KUNIT_PROC_WRITE, buffer, &len,
    106					       &pos));
    107	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, len);
    108}
    109
    110/*
    111 * Here we provide a valid struct ctl_table, but we try to read and write from
    112 * it using a buffer of zero length, so it should still fail in a similar way as
    113 * before.
    114 */
    115static void sysctl_test_api_dointvec_table_len_is_zero(struct kunit *test)
    116{
    117	int data = 0;
    118	/* Good table. */
    119	struct ctl_table table = {
    120		.procname = "foo",
    121		.data		= &data,
    122		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
    123		.mode		= 0644,
    124		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
    125		.extra1		= &i_zero,
    126		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
    127	};
    128	void __user *buffer = (void __user *)kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(int),
    129							   GFP_USER);
    130	/*
    131	 * However, now our read/write buffer has zero length.
    132	 */
    133	size_t len = 0;
    134	loff_t pos;
    135
    136	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&table, KUNIT_PROC_READ, buffer,
    137					       &len, &pos));
    138	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, len);
    139
    140	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&table, KUNIT_PROC_WRITE, buffer,
    141					       &len, &pos));
    142	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, len);
    143}
    144
    145/*
    146 * Test that proc_dointvec refuses to read when the file position is non-zero.
    147 */
    148static void sysctl_test_api_dointvec_table_read_but_position_set(
    149		struct kunit *test)
    150{
    151	int data = 0;
    152	/* Good table. */
    153	struct ctl_table table = {
    154		.procname = "foo",
    155		.data		= &data,
    156		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
    157		.mode		= 0644,
    158		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
    159		.extra1		= &i_zero,
    160		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
    161	};
    162	void __user *buffer = (void __user *)kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(int),
    163							   GFP_USER);
    164	/*
    165	 * We don't care about our buffer length because we start off with a
    166	 * non-zero file position.
    167	 */
    168	size_t len = 1234;
    169	/*
    170	 * proc_dointvec should refuse to read into the buffer since the file
    171	 * pos is non-zero.
    172	 */
    173	loff_t pos = 1;
    174
    175	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&table, KUNIT_PROC_READ, buffer,
    176					       &len, &pos));
    177	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, len);
    178}
    179
    180/*
    181 * Test that we can read a two digit number in a sufficiently size buffer.
    182 * Nothing fancy.
    183 */
    184static void sysctl_test_dointvec_read_happy_single_positive(struct kunit *test)
    185{
    186	int data = 0;
    187	/* Good table. */
    188	struct ctl_table table = {
    189		.procname = "foo",
    190		.data		= &data,
    191		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
    192		.mode		= 0644,
    193		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
    194		.extra1		= &i_zero,
    195		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
    196	};
    197	size_t len = 4;
    198	loff_t pos = 0;
    199	char *buffer = kunit_kzalloc(test, len, GFP_USER);
    200	char __user *user_buffer = (char __user *)buffer;
    201	/* Store 13 in the data field. */
    202	*((int *)table.data) = 13;
    203
    204	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&table, KUNIT_PROC_READ,
    205					       user_buffer, &len, &pos));
    206	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 3, len);
    207	buffer[len] = '\0';
    208	/* And we read 13 back out. */
    209	KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "13\n", buffer);
    210}
    211
    212/*
    213 * Same as previous test, just now with negative numbers.
    214 */
    215static void sysctl_test_dointvec_read_happy_single_negative(struct kunit *test)
    216{
    217	int data = 0;
    218	/* Good table. */
    219	struct ctl_table table = {
    220		.procname = "foo",
    221		.data		= &data,
    222		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
    223		.mode		= 0644,
    224		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
    225		.extra1		= &i_zero,
    226		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
    227	};
    228	size_t len = 5;
    229	loff_t pos = 0;
    230	char *buffer = kunit_kzalloc(test, len, GFP_USER);
    231	char __user *user_buffer = (char __user *)buffer;
    232	*((int *)table.data) = -16;
    233
    234	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&table, KUNIT_PROC_READ,
    235					       user_buffer, &len, &pos));
    236	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 4, len);
    237	buffer[len] = '\0';
    238	KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, "-16\n", buffer);
    239}
    240
    241/*
    242 * Test that a simple positive write works.
    243 */
    244static void sysctl_test_dointvec_write_happy_single_positive(struct kunit *test)
    245{
    246	int data = 0;
    247	/* Good table. */
    248	struct ctl_table table = {
    249		.procname = "foo",
    250		.data		= &data,
    251		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
    252		.mode		= 0644,
    253		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
    254		.extra1		= &i_zero,
    255		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
    256	};
    257	char input[] = "9";
    258	size_t len = sizeof(input) - 1;
    259	loff_t pos = 0;
    260	char *buffer = kunit_kzalloc(test, len, GFP_USER);
    261	char __user *user_buffer = (char __user *)buffer;
    262
    263	memcpy(buffer, input, len);
    264
    265	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&table, KUNIT_PROC_WRITE,
    266					       user_buffer, &len, &pos));
    267	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, sizeof(input) - 1, len);
    268	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, sizeof(input) - 1, pos);
    269	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 9, *((int *)table.data));
    270}
    271
    272/*
    273 * Same as previous test, but now with negative numbers.
    274 */
    275static void sysctl_test_dointvec_write_happy_single_negative(struct kunit *test)
    276{
    277	int data = 0;
    278	struct ctl_table table = {
    279		.procname = "foo",
    280		.data		= &data,
    281		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
    282		.mode		= 0644,
    283		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
    284		.extra1		= &i_zero,
    285		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
    286	};
    287	char input[] = "-9";
    288	size_t len = sizeof(input) - 1;
    289	loff_t pos = 0;
    290	char *buffer = kunit_kzalloc(test, len, GFP_USER);
    291	char __user *user_buffer = (char __user *)buffer;
    292
    293	memcpy(buffer, input, len);
    294
    295	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, proc_dointvec(&table, KUNIT_PROC_WRITE,
    296					       user_buffer, &len, &pos));
    297	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, sizeof(input) - 1, len);
    298	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, sizeof(input) - 1, pos);
    299	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, -9, *((int *)table.data));
    300}
    301
    302/*
    303 * Test that writing a value smaller than the minimum possible value is not
    304 * allowed.
    305 */
    306static void sysctl_test_api_dointvec_write_single_less_int_min(
    307		struct kunit *test)
    308{
    309	int data = 0;
    310	struct ctl_table table = {
    311		.procname = "foo",
    312		.data		= &data,
    313		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
    314		.mode		= 0644,
    315		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
    316		.extra1		= &i_zero,
    317		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
    318	};
    319	size_t max_len = 32, len = max_len;
    320	loff_t pos = 0;
    321	char *buffer = kunit_kzalloc(test, max_len, GFP_USER);
    322	char __user *user_buffer = (char __user *)buffer;
    323	unsigned long abs_of_less_than_min = (unsigned long)INT_MAX
    324					     - (INT_MAX + INT_MIN) + 1;
    325
    326	/*
    327	 * We use this rigmarole to create a string that contains a value one
    328	 * less than the minimum accepted value.
    329	 */
    330	KUNIT_ASSERT_LT(test,
    331			(size_t)snprintf(buffer, max_len, "-%lu",
    332					 abs_of_less_than_min),
    333			max_len);
    334
    335	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, -EINVAL, proc_dointvec(&table, KUNIT_PROC_WRITE,
    336						     user_buffer, &len, &pos));
    337	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, max_len, len);
    338	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, *((int *)table.data));
    339}
    340
    341/*
    342 * Test that writing the maximum possible value works.
    343 */
    344static void sysctl_test_api_dointvec_write_single_greater_int_max(
    345		struct kunit *test)
    346{
    347	int data = 0;
    348	struct ctl_table table = {
    349		.procname = "foo",
    350		.data		= &data,
    351		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
    352		.mode		= 0644,
    353		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec,
    354		.extra1		= &i_zero,
    355		.extra2         = &i_one_hundred,
    356	};
    357	size_t max_len = 32, len = max_len;
    358	loff_t pos = 0;
    359	char *buffer = kunit_kzalloc(test, max_len, GFP_USER);
    360	char __user *user_buffer = (char __user *)buffer;
    361	unsigned long greater_than_max = (unsigned long)INT_MAX + 1;
    362
    363	KUNIT_ASSERT_GT(test, greater_than_max, (unsigned long)INT_MAX);
    364	KUNIT_ASSERT_LT(test, (size_t)snprintf(buffer, max_len, "%lu",
    365					       greater_than_max),
    366			max_len);
    367	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, -EINVAL, proc_dointvec(&table, KUNIT_PROC_WRITE,
    368						     user_buffer, &len, &pos));
    369	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, max_len, len);
    370	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0, *((int *)table.data));
    371}
    372
    373static struct kunit_case sysctl_test_cases[] = {
    374	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_api_dointvec_null_tbl_data),
    375	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_api_dointvec_table_maxlen_unset),
    376	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_api_dointvec_table_len_is_zero),
    377	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_api_dointvec_table_read_but_position_set),
    378	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_dointvec_read_happy_single_positive),
    379	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_dointvec_read_happy_single_negative),
    380	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_dointvec_write_happy_single_positive),
    381	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_dointvec_write_happy_single_negative),
    382	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_api_dointvec_write_single_less_int_min),
    383	KUNIT_CASE(sysctl_test_api_dointvec_write_single_greater_int_max),
    384	{}
    385};
    386
    387static struct kunit_suite sysctl_test_suite = {
    388	.name = "sysctl_test",
    389	.test_cases = sysctl_test_cases,
    390};
    391
    392kunit_test_suites(&sysctl_test_suite);
    393
    394MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");