[LTP] [PATCH v2 3/3] syscalls/ipc: semctl09: add a test for SEM_STAT_ANY
Feiyu Zhu
zhufy.jy@cn.fujitsu.com
Thu Dec 24 10:58:16 CET 2020
Validate the content of the seminfo structure and the return value.
The return value is highest used index to a kernel table, so we call
semctl() with SEM_STAT_ANY which shouldn't fail if the value is correct.
We also test SEM_STAT_ANY by calling semctl() directly by syscall(),
because glibc have a bug that caused fails to pass the buffer specified
by the caller to the kernel.
We parse /proc/sysvipc/sem and check that the information is
consistent with the content of seminfo structure.
Signed-off-by: Feiyu Zhu <zhufy.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
Reviewed-by: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
runtest/syscalls | 1 +
runtest/syscalls-ipc | 1 +
testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/.gitignore | 1 +
testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/Makefile | 2 +-
testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/semctl09.c | 197 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
5 files changed, 201 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/semctl09.c
diff --git a/runtest/syscalls b/runtest/syscalls
index 28174dd..1549916 100644
--- a/runtest/syscalls
+++ b/runtest/syscalls
@@ -1179,6 +1179,7 @@ semctl05 semctl05
semctl06 semctl06
semctl07 semctl07
semctl08 semctl08
+semctl09 semctl09
semget01 semget01
semget02 semget02
diff --git a/runtest/syscalls-ipc b/runtest/syscalls-ipc
index 9524b1a..68fff40 100644
--- a/runtest/syscalls-ipc
+++ b/runtest/syscalls-ipc
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ semctl05 semctl05
semctl06 semctl06
semctl07 semctl07
semctl08 semctl08
+semctl09 semctl09
semget01 semget01
semget02 semget02
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/.gitignore b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/.gitignore
index 6189a04..87d8393 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/.gitignore
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/.gitignore
@@ -6,3 +6,4 @@
/semctl06
/semctl07
/semctl08
+/semctl09
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/Makefile b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/Makefile
index f711e77..c6d8597 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/Makefile
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/Makefile
@@ -8,6 +8,6 @@ LTPLIBS = ltpipc ltpnewipc
include $(top_srcdir)/include/mk/testcases.mk
semctl01 semctl02 semctl03 semctl04 semctl05 semctl06 semctl07: LTPLDLIBS = -lltpipc
-semctl08: LTPLDLIBS = -lltpnewipc
+semctl08 semctl09: LTPLDLIBS = -lltpnewipc
include $(top_srcdir)/include/mk/generic_leaf_target.mk
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/semctl09.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/semctl09.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..131bfbc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/semctl/semctl09.c
@@ -0,0 +1,197 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
+/*
+ * Copyright (c) 2020 FUJITSU LIMITED. All rights reserved.
+ * Author: Feiyu Zhu <zhufy.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
+ */
+/*\
+ * [DESCRIPTION]
+ *
+ * Call semctl() with SEM_INFO flag and check that:
+ *
+ * * The returned index points to a valid SEM by calling SEM_STAT_ANY
+ * * Also count that valid indexes < returned max index sums up to semusz
+ * * And the data are consistent with /proc/sysvipc/sem
+ *
+ * There is a possible race between the call to the semctl() and read from the
+ * proc file so this test cannot be run in parallel with any IPC testcases that
+ * adds or removes semaphore set.
+ *
+ * Note what we create a semaphore set in the test setup to make sure
+ * that there is at least one during the testrun.
+ *
+ * Also note that for SEM_INFO the members of the seminfo structure have
+ * completely different meaning than their names seems to suggest.
+ *
+ * We also calling semctl() directly by syscall(), because of a glibc bug:
+ * * semctl SEM_STAT_ANY fails to pass the buffer specified by the caller
+ * * to the kernel.
+ * * https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26637
+ *
+ * The glibc bug was fixed in:
+ * * commit 574500a108be1d2a6a0dc97a075c9e0a98371aba
+ * * Author: Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@altlinux.org>
+ * * Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 17:10:20 +0000 (14:10 -0300)
+\*/
+
+#include <stdio.h>
+#include <pwd.h>
+#include "tst_test.h"
+#include "tst_safe_sysv_ipc.h"
+#include "libnewipc.h"
+#include "lapi/sem.h"
+#include "lapi/syscalls.h"
+
+static int sem_id = -1;
+static uid_t nobody_uid, root_uid;
+static union semun un;
+
+/*
+ * Note: semctl man-pages may have wrong description. We should use sem_ds
+ * struct(un.buf) instead of seminfo struct(un.__buf).
+ */
+static inline int do_semctl(int semid, int semnum, int cmd)
+{
+ switch (tst_variant) {
+ case 0:
+ return tst_syscall(__NR_semctl, semid, semnum, cmd, &un.buf);
+ case 1:
+ return semctl(semid, semnum, cmd, &un.buf);
+ }
+ return -1;
+}
+
+static void test_info(void)
+{
+ switch (tst_variant) {
+ case 0:
+ tst_res(TINFO, "Test SYS_semctl syscall");
+ break;
+ case 1:
+ tst_res(TINFO, "Test libc semctl()");
+ break;
+ }
+}
+
+static struct tcases {
+ uid_t *uid;
+ char *desc;
+} tests[] = {
+ {&nobody_uid, "with nobody user",},
+ {&root_uid, "with root user",},
+};
+
+static void parse_proc_sysvipc(struct seminfo *info)
+{
+ FILE *f = fopen("/proc/sysvipc/sem", "r");
+ int semset_cnt = 0;
+ int sem_cnt = 0;
+
+ /* Eat header */
+ for (;;) {
+ int c = fgetc(f);
+
+ if (c == '\n' || c == EOF)
+ break;
+ }
+
+ int nsems;
+ /*
+ * Sum sem set, nsems for all elements listed, which should equal
+ * the data returned in the seminfo structure.
+ */
+ while (fscanf(f, "%*i %*i %*i %i %*i %*i %*i %*i %*i %*i",
+ &nsems) > 0){
+ semset_cnt++;
+ sem_cnt += nsems;
+ }
+
+ if (info->semusz != semset_cnt) {
+ tst_res(TFAIL, "semusz = %i, expected %i",
+ info->semusz, semset_cnt);
+ } else {
+ tst_res(TPASS, "semset_cnt = %i", semset_cnt);
+ }
+
+ if (info->semaem != sem_cnt) {
+ tst_res(TFAIL, "semaem = %i, expected %i",
+ info->semaem, sem_cnt);
+ } else {
+ tst_res(TPASS, "sen_cnt = %i", sem_cnt);
+ }
+
+ fclose(f);
+}
+
+static void verify_semctl(unsigned int n)
+{
+ struct tcases *tc = &tests[n];
+ int i, semid, cnt = 0;
+ struct seminfo info;
+ union semun arg;
+
+ tst_res(TINFO, "Test SEM_STAT_ANY %s", tc->desc);
+
+ SAFE_SETEUID(*tc->uid);
+
+ arg.__buf = &info;
+
+ TEST(semctl(sem_id, 0, SEM_INFO, arg));
+
+ if (TST_RET == -1) {
+ tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "semctl(sem_id, 0, SEM_INFO, ...)");
+ return;
+ }
+
+ semid = do_semctl(TST_RET, 0, SEM_STAT_ANY);
+
+ if (errno == EFAULT) {
+ tst_res(TFAIL, "SEM_STAT_ANY doesn't pass the buffer "
+ "specified by the caller to kernel");
+ return;
+ } else if (semid == -1) {
+ tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "SEM_INFO haven't returned a valid index");
+ } else {
+ tst_res(TPASS, "SEM_INFO returned valid index %li to semid %i",
+ TST_RET, semid);
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i <= TST_RET; i++) {
+ if ((do_semctl(i, 0, SEM_STAT_ANY)) != -1)
+ cnt++;
+ }
+
+ if (cnt == info.semusz) {
+ tst_res(TPASS, "Counted used = %i", cnt);
+ } else {
+ tst_res(TFAIL, "Counted used = %i, semuse = %i",
+ cnt, info.semusz);
+ }
+
+ parse_proc_sysvipc(&info);
+}
+
+static void setup(void)
+{
+ struct passwd *ltpuser = SAFE_GETPWNAM("nobody");
+
+ nobody_uid = ltpuser->pw_uid;
+ root_uid = 0;
+
+ sem_id = SAFE_SEMGET(IPC_PRIVATE, 2, IPC_CREAT | 0600);
+ test_info();
+}
+
+static void cleanup(void)
+{
+ if (sem_id >= 0)
+ SAFE_SEMCTL(sem_id, 0, IPC_RMID);
+}
+
+static struct tst_test test = {
+ .setup = setup,
+ .cleanup = cleanup,
+ .test = verify_semctl,
+ .tcnt = ARRAY_SIZE(tests),
+ .test_variants = 2,
+ .needs_root = 1,
+};
--
1.8.3.1
More information about the ltp
mailing list