Repository navigation
tests/extmod/ussl_basic.py fails for modussl_mbedtls #4364
Description
Well, subj. ussl_basic.py is coded too much relying on modussl_axtls behavior.
--- extmod_ussl_basic.py.exp 2018-12-16 22:45:07.539600906 +0300
+++ extmod_ussl_basic.py.out 2018-12-16 22:45:07.539600906 +0300
@@ -1,9 +1,7 @@
-ssl_handshake_status: -256
+mbedtls_ssl_handshake error: -7280
wrap_socket: OSError(5,)
-<_SSLSocket
-setblocking: NotImplementedError
-4
-b''
-read: OSError(-261,)
-read: OSError(9,)
-write: OSError(9,)
+mbedtls_ssl_handshake error: -7280
+Traceback (most recent call last):
+ File "extmod/ussl_basic.py", line 18, in <module>
+OSError: [Errno 5] EIO
+CRASH
Activity
Jongy commentedon Feb 7, 2019
Hmm.. They really expect an inherently different behavior.
What should we do in such case? Is there any option to run tests based on external reading of
mpconfig.h? If not, then perhaps we should add aussl.backendresolving toaxtlsormbedtls, then the test run only the relevant cases based on the implementation.Btw, this partly stems the same problem as I've described in #4475.
pfalcon commentedon Feb 7, 2019
That test is just a hack.
Adding more bytes is not allowed ;-). (Well, in coverage build, everything is allowed).
Jongy commentedon Feb 8, 2019
In the CI,
run-testsuses the coverage build? If so, I can add aMICROPY_PY_USSL_BACKENDthing, enabled only for coverage.pfalcon commentedon Feb 8, 2019
Well, as I told, that test is hack. Patching it with even more hacks unlikely seems like a good investment of effort.
Instead imagine how a real test would be written: allow to override time and random sources for the underlying TLS lib, then feed predefined/read expected TLS records. Well, could also implement real TLS handling on the tester side ;-).
If it doesn't do that, it's a hack. And if some lines of a hack doesn't work with different TLS implementations, those lines are very bad hack. Their removal is obvious solution. Well, could also keep them in a dirty attempt to keep coverage, just test for variants of expected behavior explicitly (not by printing stuff).
pfalcon commentedon Mar 1, 2019
Note that #4481 was posted also as an example that adding any adhoc, mis-leveled tests (which test not TLS, but low-levelish, corner behavior of current implementations) would only complicate matters.
dpgeorge commentedon Jul 19, 2022
Fixed by 18ecc29
tests/extmod/ussl_basic: Make test run on axtls and mbedtls.
tests/extmod/ussl_basic: Make test run on axtls and mbedtls.