Chromium Code Reviews
chromiumcodereview-hr@appspot.gserviceaccount.com (chromiumcodereview-hr) | Please choose your nickname with Settings | Help | Chromium Project | Gerrit Changes | Sign out
(827)

Unified Diff: util/mach/child_port_server_test.cc

Issue 754123002: Add ChildPortServer, a MachMessageServer::Interface implementation for the child_port subsystem (Closed) Base URL: https://chromium.googlesource.com/crashpad/crashpad@child_port_defs
Patch Set: Address review feedback Created 6 years, 1 month ago
Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.
Jump to:
View side-by-side diff with in-line comments
Download patch
Index: util/mach/child_port_server_test.cc
diff --git a/util/mach/child_port_server_test.cc b/util/mach/child_port_server_test.cc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e655a9c742b26d3cab77e60a6e599c9e8a332c5b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/util/mach/child_port_server_test.cc
@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
+// Copyright 2014 The Crashpad Authors. All rights reserved.
+//
+// Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+// you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+// You may obtain a copy of the License at
+//
+// http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+//
+// Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+// distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+// WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+// See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+// limitations under the License.
+
+#include "util/mach/child_port_server.h"
+
+#include <string.h>
+
+#include "gmock/gmock.h"
+#include "gtest/gtest.h"
+#include "util/mach/mach_extensions.h"
+
+namespace crashpad {
+namespace test {
+namespace {
+
+using testing::Eq;
+using testing::Pointee;
+using testing::Return;
+
+// Fake Mach ports. These aren’t used as ports in these tests, they’re just used
+// as cookies to make sure that the correct values get passed to the correct
+// places.
+const mach_port_t kServerLocalPort = 0x05050505;
+const mach_port_t kCheckInPort = 0x06060606;
+
+// Other fake values.
+const mach_msg_type_name_t kCheckInPortRightType = MACH_MSG_TYPE_PORT_SEND;
+const child_port_token_t kCheckInToken = 0xfedcba9876543210;
+
+// The definition of the request structure from child_port.h isn’t available
+// here. It needs custom initialization code, so duplicate the expected
+// definition of the structure from child_port.h here in this file, and provide
+// the initialization code as a method in true object-oriented fashion.
+
+struct __attribute__((packed, aligned(4))) ChildPortCheckInRequest {
+ mach_msg_header_t Head;
+ mach_msg_body_t msgh_body;
+ mach_msg_port_descriptor_t port;
+ NDR_record_t NDR;
+ child_port_token_t token;
+
+ void InitializeForTesting() {
Robert Sesek 2014/11/25 18:56:51 Just make this the constructor instead?
Mark Mentovai 2014/11/25 19:29:36 Robert Sesek wrote:
+ memset(this, 0xa5, sizeof(*this));
+ Head.msgh_bits =
+ MACH_MSGH_BITS(0, MACH_MSG_TYPE_PORT_SEND) | MACH_MSGH_BITS_COMPLEX;
+ Head.msgh_size = sizeof(*this);
+ Head.msgh_remote_port = MACH_PORT_NULL;
+ Head.msgh_local_port = kServerLocalPort;
+ Head.msgh_id = 10011;
+ msgh_body.msgh_descriptor_count = 1;
+ port.name = kCheckInPort;
+ port.disposition = kCheckInPortRightType;
+ port.type = MACH_MSG_PORT_DESCRIPTOR;
+ NDR = NDR_record;
+ token = kCheckInToken;
+ }
+};
+
+struct __attribute__((packed, aligned(4))) MIGReply {
+ mach_msg_header_t Head;
+ NDR_record_t NDR;
+ kern_return_t RetCode;
+
+ void InitializeForTesting() {
+ memset(this, 0x5a, sizeof(*this));
+ RetCode = KERN_FAILURE;
+ }
+
+ void Verify() {
+ EXPECT_EQ(implicit_cast<mach_msg_bits_t>(MACH_MSGH_BITS(0, 0)),
+ Head.msgh_bits);
+ EXPECT_EQ(sizeof(*this), Head.msgh_size);
+ EXPECT_EQ(kMachPortNull, Head.msgh_remote_port);
+ EXPECT_EQ(kMachPortNull, Head.msgh_local_port);
+ EXPECT_EQ(10111, Head.msgh_id);
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, memcmp(&NDR, &NDR_record, sizeof(NDR)));
+ EXPECT_EQ(MIG_NO_REPLY, RetCode);
+ }
+};
+
+class MockChildPortServerInterface : public ChildPortServer::Interface {
+ public:
+ MOCK_METHOD5(HandleChildPortCheckIn,
+ kern_return_t(child_port_server_t server,
+ const child_port_token_t token,
+ mach_port_t port,
+ mach_msg_type_name_t right_type,
+ bool* destroy_complex_request));
+};
+
+TEST(ChildPortServer, MockChildPortCheckIn) {
Mark Mentovai 2014/11/25 17:27:31 I also added this bonus test.
+ MockChildPortServerInterface server_interface;
+ ChildPortServer server(&server_interface);
+
+ ChildPortCheckInRequest request;
+ EXPECT_LE(sizeof(request), server.MachMessageServerRequestSize());
+ request.InitializeForTesting();
+
+ MIGReply reply;
+ EXPECT_LE(sizeof(reply), server.MachMessageServerReplySize());
+ reply.InitializeForTesting();
+
+ EXPECT_CALL(server_interface,
+ HandleChildPortCheckIn(kServerLocalPort,
+ kCheckInToken,
+ kCheckInPort,
+ kCheckInPortRightType,
+ Pointee(Eq(false))))
+ .WillOnce(Return(MIG_NO_REPLY))
+ .RetiresOnSaturation();
+
+ bool destroy_complex_request = false;
+ EXPECT_TRUE(server.MachMessageServerFunction(
+ reinterpret_cast<mach_msg_header_t*>(&request),
+ reinterpret_cast<mach_msg_header_t*>(&reply),
+ &destroy_complex_request));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(destroy_complex_request);
+
+ reply.Verify();
+}
+
+} // namespace
+} // namespace test
+} // namespace crashpad

Powered by Google App Engine
This is Rietveld 408576698