On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 01:17:35PM +0100, Ivan Orlov wrote:
> On 5/19/24 20:12, Kees Cook wrote:
> > #define test(condition, msg, ...) \
> > ({
> > \
> > int cond = (condition); \
> > if (cond) \
> > - pr_warn("[%d] " msg "\n", __LINE__, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
> > + KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE_MSG(test, cond, msg, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
> > cond; \
> > })
> It looks like the 'test' macro is not used anymore, so probably it should be
> removed.
Oops, yes. Thanks!
> > +static int usercopy_test_init(struct kunit *test)
> > +{
> > + struct usercopy_test_priv *priv;
> > + unsigned long user_addr;
> > - if (ret == 0) {
> > - pr_info("tests passed.\n");
> > - return 0;
> > - }
> > + priv = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!priv)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
>
> Should the check be done with KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL here as well, as
> it is done with priv->kmem?
Yes, that's much more idiomatic. I'll adjust this too.
> Other than that,
>
> Tested-by: Ivan Orlov <[email protected]>
Thanks!
--
Kees Cook
