Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit] test: adapt tests checking loading bytecode files

[Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>]

Igor,

On 16.02.22, Igor Munkin wrote:
> Sergey,
> 
> On 12.10.21, Sergey Kaplun wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > Thanks for the fixes!
> > 
> > On 11.10.21, Максим Корякшин wrote:
> 
> <snipped>
> 
> > > >> --- FIXME: Loading bytecode with an extra header (BOM or "#")
> > > >> +-- Loading bytecode with an extra header (BOM or "#")
> > > >> -- is disabled for security reasons since LuaJIT-2.0.0-beta10.
> > > >> -- For more information see comment for `lj_lex_setup()`
> > > >> -- in <src/lj_lex.c>.
> > > >> -- Also see commit 53a285c0c3544ff5dea7c67b741c3c2d06d22b47
> > > >> -- (Disable loading bytecode with an extra header (BOM or #!).).
> > > >> -- See also  https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/5691 .
> > > >> --- The test is disabled for LuaJIT.
> > > >> -prepfile("#comment with a binary file\n"..string.dump(loadstring("print(1)")))
> > > >> --- RUN("lua %s > %s", prog, out)
> > > >> --- checkout("1\n")
> > > >> -
> > > >> -prepfile("#comment with a binary file\r\n"..string.dump(loadstring("print(1)")))
> > > >> --- FIXME: Behavior is different for LuaJIT. See the comment above.
> > > >> --- The test is disabled for LuaJIT.
> > > >> --- RUN("lua %s > %s", prog, out)
> > > >> --- checkout("1\n")
> > > >> +-- The test is adapted to LuaJIT behavior.
> > > >> +prepfile(string.dump(loadstring("print(1)")))
> > > >> +RUN("lua %s > %s", prog, out)
> > > >> +checkout("1\n")
> > > >
> > > >May be it is better to test `NoRun()` for 1 binary file with a comment at the
> > > >first string and `Run()` for another binary file without the comment.
> > 
> > What are your thoughts about this idea?
> 
> What are you going to check with this? To check whether unsafe bytecode
> loading is still disabled?

Yes, for example.

> 
> > 
> 
> <snipped>
> 
> > -- 
> > Best regards,
> > Sergey Kaplun
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> IM

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun