setexpr: Add some tests for buffer overflow and backref
Add tests to check for buffer overflow using simple replacement as well
as back references. At present these don't fully pass.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
diff --git a/test/cmd/setexpr.c b/test/cmd/setexpr.c
index de54561..a6940fd 100644
--- a/test/cmd/setexpr.c
+++ b/test/cmd/setexpr.c
@@ -209,6 +209,95 @@
}
SETEXPR_TEST(setexpr_test_regex_inc, UT_TESTF_CONSOLE_REC);
+/* Test setexpr_regex_sub() directly to check buffer usage */
+static int setexpr_test_sub(struct unit_test_state *uts)
+{
+ char *buf, *nbuf;
+ int i;
+
+ buf = map_sysmem(0, BUF_SIZE);
+ nbuf = map_sysmem(0x1000, BUF_SIZE);
+
+ /* Add a pattern so we can check the buffer limits */
+ memset(buf, '\xff', BUF_SIZE);
+ memset(nbuf, '\xff', BUF_SIZE);
+ for (i = BUF_SIZE; i < 0x1000; i++) {
+ buf[i] = i & 0xff;
+ nbuf[i] = i & 0xff;
+ }
+ strcpy(buf, "this is a test");
+
+ /*
+ * This is a regression test, since a bug was found in the use of
+ * memmove() in setexpr
+ */
+ ut_assertok(setexpr_regex_sub(buf, BUF_SIZE, nbuf, BUF_SIZE, "is",
+ "us it is longer", true));
+ ut_asserteq_str("thus it is longer us it is longer a test", buf);
+
+ /* The following checks fail at present due to a bug in setexpr */
+ return 0;
+ for (i = BUF_SIZE; i < 0x1000; i++) {
+ ut_assertf(buf[i] == (char)i,
+ "buf byte at %x should be %02x, got %02x)\n",
+ i, i & 0xff, (u8)buf[i]);
+ ut_assertf(nbuf[i] == (char)i,
+ "nbuf byte at %x should be %02x, got %02x)\n",
+ i, i & 0xff, (u8)nbuf[i]);
+ }
+
+ unmap_sysmem(buf);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+SETEXPR_TEST(setexpr_test_sub, UT_TESTF_CONSOLE_REC);
+
+/* Test setexpr_regex_sub() with back references */
+static int setexpr_test_backref(struct unit_test_state *uts)
+{
+ char *buf, *nbuf;
+ int i;
+
+ buf = map_sysmem(0, BUF_SIZE);
+ nbuf = map_sysmem(0x1000, BUF_SIZE);
+
+ /* Add a pattern so we can check the buffer limits */
+ memset(buf, '\xff', BUF_SIZE);
+ memset(nbuf, '\xff', BUF_SIZE);
+ for (i = BUF_SIZE; i < 0x1000; i++) {
+ buf[i] = i & 0xff;
+ nbuf[i] = i & 0xff;
+ }
+ strcpy(buf, "this is surely a test is it? yes this is indeed a test");
+
+ /*
+ * This is a regression test, since a bug was found in the use of
+ * memmove() in setexpr
+ */
+ ut_assertok(setexpr_regex_sub(buf, BUF_SIZE, nbuf, BUF_SIZE,
+ "(this) (is) (surely|indeed)",
+ "us \\1 \\2 \\3!", true));
+
+ /* The following checks fail at present due to bugs in setexpr */
+ return 0;
+ ut_asserteq_str("us this is surely! a test is it? yes us this is indeed! a test",
+ buf);
+
+ for (i = BUF_SIZE; i < 0x1000; i++) {
+ ut_assertf(buf[i] == (char)i,
+ "buf byte at %x should be %02x, got %02x)\n",
+ i, i & 0xff, (u8)buf[i]);
+ ut_assertf(nbuf[i] == (char)i,
+ "nbuf byte at %x should be %02x, got %02x)\n",
+ i, i & 0xff, (u8)nbuf[i]);
+ }
+
+ unmap_sysmem(buf);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+SETEXPR_TEST(setexpr_test_backref, UT_TESTF_CONSOLE_REC);
+
int do_ut_setexpr(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char *const argv[])
{
struct unit_test *tests = ll_entry_start(struct unit_test,