Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 30 Aug 2022 12:34:41 -0400 | From | Kent Overstreet <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] lib/test_printf.c: Add ip6 tests |
| |
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:32:19AM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On 30/08/2022 03.47, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > On (22/08/29 20:31), Kent Overstreet wrote: > >> diff --git a/lib/test_printf.c b/lib/test_printf.c > >> index 4bd15a593f..6a56dbf076 100644 > >> --- a/lib/test_printf.c > >> +++ b/lib/test_printf.c > >> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ > >> #include <linux/dcache.h> > >> #include <linux/socket.h> > >> #include <linux/in.h> > >> +#include <linux/in6.h> > >> > >> #include <linux/gfp.h> > >> #include <linux/mm.h> > >> @@ -61,6 +62,9 @@ do_test(int bufsize, const char *expect, int elen, > >> pr_warn("vsnprintf(buf, %d, \"%s\", ...) returned %d, expected %d\n", > >> bufsize, fmt, ret, elen); > >> return 1; > >> + pr_warn("vsnprintf(buf, %d, \"%s\", ...) returned %d, expected %d (%s != %s)\n", > >> + bufsize, fmt, ret, elen, test_buffer, expect); > >> + return 1; > >> } > > > > I assume you intended to replace first pr_warn() with the second one? > > Probably, but that's not ok. The test framework does not trust > vsnprintf(), especially not when it does not behave as expected. So I > very much carefully do not treat the buffer as a nul-terminated string > until I have verified that it does have a nul character (that's tested a > few lines below), and then when I compare the buffer contents can I pass > it as a %s argument. Also note how that test takes the 'we may be > testing a truncated write' into consideration, by printing the expect > string via %.*s. > > tl;dr, please just remove that hunk.
Debugging code I meant to remove, whoops.
| |