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