lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [May]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add a null pointer check for the serial_test_tp_attach_query
From
Date
On 5/3/24 5:47 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 4/24/24 4:04 AM, Kunwu Chan wrote:
>> There is a 'malloc' call, which can be unsuccessful.
>> Add the malloc failure checking to avoid possible null
>> dereference.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@kylinos.cn>
>> ---
>>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tp_attach_query.c | 3 +++
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tp_attach_query.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tp_attach_query.c
>> index 655d69f0ff0b..302b25408a53 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tp_attach_query.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tp_attach_query.c
>> @@ -39,6 +39,9 @@ void serial_test_tp_attach_query(void)
>>       attr.wakeup_events = 1;
>>       query = malloc(sizeof(*query) + sizeof(__u32) * num_progs);
>> +    if (CHECK(!query, "malloc()", "error:%s\n", strerror(errno)))
>
> Series looks reasonable, small nit on CHECK() : Lets use ASSERT*() macros given they are
> preferred over the latter :
>
> if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(buf, "malloc"))

( Also as a side-note: Fixes tag on all these patches is not needed given this will just
end up spamming stable tree. If you indeed end up with NULL then the tests will just
segfault & fail. )

>> +        return;
>> +
>>       for (i = 0; i < num_progs; i++) {
>>           err = bpf_prog_test_load(file, BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, &obj[i],
>>                       &prog_fd[i]);
>>
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-03 17:51    [W:1.499 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site