Unit testing C code with LD_PRELOAD

One of my side projects is a tiny kernel/operating system, which I started to learn more about operating systems (OS) and kernel development in general. The codebase is fairly small (around 4K lines of code at the time of writing) but I started to face a few bugs that I could have likely avoided with unit testing.

Writing a kernel often implies creating a lot of things from scratch, even the most basic “tools”. For example, some sort of small C library is required early in the process. Yet, it is hard to port an existing libc when there is nothing else. Such a C library does not have tons of functions but everything else likely depends on them. Therefore, it is crucial to write them correctly and unit testing can help.

In my project, I chose to have a unified C library for both my kernel code (which uses a library sometimes called libk) and userland code (which uses a libc). Because my C library provides the same API as other libc (e.g., the one from my main system), I could not directly import my functions in my test code. I thought about this problem and came up with three options:

  1. Introduce a PREFIX() macro to alias my functions and import these aliased functions in the test code. This is needed because “global function” names should be unique in C. This option would improve isolation but it would make the kernel code harder to read.
  2. Use my C library to write test programs. This option would make debugging harder because my library could introduce bugs in the test code. I would prefer not to rely on my incomplete libc too much.
  3. Override the function under test (FUT) when running the test program. It is a combination of (1) and (2) and this guarantees that only the FUT is tested.

This idea of monkey-patching code did ring a bell: the LD_PRELOAD environment variable! In order to understand how this works, let’s remember that programs can be either statically or dynamically linked. The former creates programs that contain a “copy” of the functions borrowed from external libraries while the latter binds such functions upon program execution.

LD_PRELOAD can be used to load a shared library before other libraries, offering us the ability to change the behaviors of the functions used by a program 🔥

Example

Let’s take an example with an enhanced version of a “Hello, World” written in C:

// hello.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>

int main() {
  const char* hello = "hello!";
  char* name = malloc(7 * sizeof(char));
  strcpy(name, hello);

  printf("%s\n", name);

  free(name);

  return 0;
}

The example above uses strcpy() to copy a string that will be printed to the standard output as shown below (I used gcc -o hello hello.c to compile this program):

$ ./hello
hello!

As mentioned previously, we could leverage LD_PRELOAD to override the behavior of the strcpy() function. In order to do this, we need to create a new file (evil.c) with the following content:

// evil.c
char* strcpy(char* dest, const char* src) {
  const char* evil = "oooops";

  while (*evil) {
    *dest++ = *evil++;
  }
  *dest = '\0';

  return dest;
}

Instead of using the content from the second argument, this function copies its own string 😈 LD_PRELOAD needs a shared library so we have to compile this file with gcc -fPIC -shared -o evil.so evil.c. PIC stands for Position Independent Code, which means that the generated code is not dependent on being located at a specific address in order to work. The -shared option instructs the linker to create a shared object (.so), which is our final library. Let’s try it now:

$ LD_PRELOAD=./evil.so ./hello
oooops

Heh, what happened?

This worked because the hello program did not embed strcpy(). We can verify it with objdump (with the -t flag to print the symbol table entries of the file):

$ objdump -t hello

hello:     file format elf64-x86-64

SYMBOL TABLE:
...
0000000000000000       F *UND*	0000000000000000              strcpy@@GLIBC_2.2.5
...
000000000000071a g     F .text	0000000000000053              main
...

Although it is technically not correct, let’s pretend that a function and a symbol are the same. The partial output above shows the table entry for the strcpy function. The first column represents its address and 0000000000000000 (as well as *UND*) means the function is not defined in this binary file. This table also lists our main function, which can be found at address 000000000000071a (i.e. somewhere inside the binary file).

Now, let’s explore our shared library with the same command:

$ objdump -t evil.so

evil.so:     file format elf64-x86-64

SYMBOL TABLE:
...
000000000000057a g     F .text	000000000000004e strcpy
...

Our library provides a strcpy function at address 000000000000004e. When we run the hello program, the operating system binds the symbols to their actual definitions located in shared libraries. The ldd tool can tell us which shared libraries are used when we want to execute our program:

$ ldd ./hello
    linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fff775c3000)
    libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007fd4ae478000)
    /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fd4aea6b000)

We used LD_PRELOAD to tell the operating system (and its dynamic linker) to use our shared library (almost) first, which is why our program ended up calling our version of strcpy:

$ LD_PRELOAD=./evil.so ldd ./hello
    linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fffa0759000)
    ./evil.so (0x00007ff46f155000)
    libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007ff46ed64000)
    /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007ff46f559000)

That’s what happened!

Compilers are (too) smart.

I used a similar approach to write tests for my little kernel (patch) but it did not always work well. For example, I could not test the strlen() function because the compiler optimized my code in a way that there was no need to link to the strlen() function anymore. In other words, the symbol table did not contain any reference to strlen.

We can update our hello.c file to reproduce the problem. For example, let’s add a strlen() call to output the number 4:

diff --git a/hello.c b/hello.c
index a9744a9..f2b139d 100644
--- a/hello.c
+++ b/hello.c
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ int main() {
   char* name = malloc(7 * sizeof(char));
   strcpy(name, hello);

-  printf("%s\n", name);
+  printf("%s %ld\n", name, strlen("four"));

   free(name);

As expected, inspecting the symbol table of the recompiled hello program will lead to no reference to the strlen() function, which is why I did not provide any output here. Instead, we can confirm that the compiler optimized our code by disassembling the program with objdump -d:

$ objdump -d -Mintel hello

hello:     file format elf64-x86-64

...
 749:	e8 82 fe ff ff       	call   5d0 <strcpy@plt>
 74e:	48 8b 45 f8          	mov    rax,QWORD PTR [rbp-0x8]
 752:	ba 04 00 00 00       	mov    edx,0x4
 757:	48 89 c6             	mov    rsi,rax
 75a:	48 8d 3d aa 00 00 00 	lea    rdi,[rip+0xaa]        # 80b <_IO_stdin_used+0xb>
 761:	b8 00 00 00 00       	mov    eax,0x0
 766:	e8 75 fe ff ff       	call   5e0 <printf@plt>
...

Without knowing assembler, we can notice that there is no call to strlen. Instead the value 4 (0x4) is moved to a register before calling printf. The compiler optimized our code!

Conclusion

I leveraged the LD_PRELOAD environment variable to inject a function under test in a test program. The test program is linked against whatever libc is installed on the system and only the FUT is replaced. That way, the test code can be trusted and we can compare the behavior of the FUT with the equivalent function in the system’s libc.

While it is an efficient method to write simple unit tests, it still requires some extra checks to make sure we are not testing the numerous compiler optimizations that would completely skip the FUT.

With these libc functions implemented and tested, I can now build new features on top of them with confidence and write “traditional” unit tests for these modules.

Feel free to fork and edit this post if you found a typo, thank you so much! This post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Comments

Sorry, I removed all comments on December 19, 2019. You can reply to this tweet or send me an email if you like.