[LTP] [PATCH 3/3] syscalls/shmat03.c: add new regression test

[Xiao Yang]

On 2017/06/22 20:02, Jan Stancek wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Xiao Yang"<yangx.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> To: "Cyril Hrubis"<chrubis@suse.cz>, "Jan Stancek"<jstancek@redhat.com>
>> Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
>> Sent: Thursday, 22 June, 2017 1:08:03 PM
>> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 3/3] syscalls/shmat03.c: add new regression test
>>
>> On 2017/06/22 18:09, Xiao Yang wrote:
>>> On 2017/06/01 19:53, Xiao Yang wrote:
>>>> On 2017/05/29 22:57, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>> +    addr = shmat(shm_id, LOCATION, SHM_RND);
>>>>>> +    if (addr != (void *)-1)
>>>>>> +        tst_res(TINFO, "shmat() attached a nil-page unexpectedly");
>>>>>> +    else
>>>>>> +        tst_res(TINFO, "shmat() didn't attach a nil-page");
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +    ((char *)addr)[0] = 'A';
>>>>> So if shmat() fails we try to write to (char*)-1 address, that does not
>>>>> sound right. Why don't we exit the test with TPASS in that case and
>>>>> skip
>>>>> the part that tries to write to invalid address?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or at least dereference NULL here instead of the address returned from
>>>>> shmat() since that is guaranteed to SEGFAULT.
>>>> Hi Cyril
>>>>
>>>> I failed to call shmat() as root and returned EACCES if selinux is
>>>> Enforcing.
>>>> Do you know how to fix this problem?
>>> Hi Cyril
>>>
>>> Sorry, I have fixed this issue, I will send v3 patch soon.
>> Hi Cyril and jan
>>
>> Sorry， i tried to fix this issue， but failed.  Could you help me to
>> look into it? Thanks a lot! :-(
>> shmat（） only attached a nil-page as root when selinux is not Enforcing.
> Hi,
>
> as Richard mentioned already, this appears to be same test as his:
>    http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2017-May/004568.html
>
> so I guess we can drop 3/3 from your set, and use Richard's
> version, which is doing what Cyril suggested.
Hi Jan and Cyril

Agreed.  we could drop 3/3 from my patch set.
Could you review my 2/3 patch, thanks a lot! :-)

Thanks,
Xiao Yang.
> Regards,
> Jan
>
>
>