[LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] syscalls/creat09: Add umask test condition

[xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com]

Hi Martin

Thanks for your review.

I have a holiday  next week, so will send v2 when I come back.

Best Regards
Yang Xu

> Hi,
> 
> On 03. 08. 22 5:24, Yang Xu wrote:
>> A kernel patch set that fix setgid strip logic under umask(S_IXGRP) found by
>> this case has been merged into linux-next branch[1].
>>
>> I will add acl and umask test[2] in xfstests because there is more suitable
>> to do this.
>>
>> Here I just only add umask test condition simply.
>>
>> [1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?h=next-20220802&id=1639a49ccdce
>> [2]https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/fstests/list/?series=662984
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
>> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>> v1-v2:
>> 1.update linux-next and xfstests url
>> 2.use Ternary Operator instead of switch or if
>>   testcases/kernel/syscalls/creat/creat09.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/creat/creat09.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/creat/creat09.c
>> index bed7bddb0..7077cbcff 100644
>> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/creat/creat09.c
>> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/creat/creat09.c
>> @@ -28,6 +28,16 @@
>>    *  Date:   Fri Jan 22 16:48:18 2021 -0800
>>    *
>>    *  xfs: fix up non-directory creation in SGID directories
>> + *
>> + * When use acl or umask, it still has bug.
>> + *
>> + * Fixed in:
>> + *
>> + *  commit 1639a49ccdce58ea248841ed9b23babcce6dbb0b
>> + *  Author: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com>
>> + *  Date:   Thu July 14 14:11:27 2022 +0800
>> + *
>> + *  fs: move S_ISGID stripping into the vfs_*() helpers
>>    */
>>   
>>   #include <stdlib.h>
>> @@ -94,8 +104,11 @@ static void file_test(const char *name)
>>   		tst_res(TPASS, "%s: Setgid bit not set", name);
>>   }
>>   
>> -static void run(void)
>> +static void run(unsigned int n)
>>   {
>> +	umask(n ? S_IXGRP : 0);
>> +	tst_res(TINFO, "under umask(%s) situation", n ? "S_IXGRP" : "0");
> 
> It'd be much cleaner to use an array of testcase structures and then call:
> tst_res(TINFO, testcase_list[n].name);
> umask(testcase_list[n].mask);
> 
> ...
> 
> .tcnt = ARRAY_SIZE(testcase_list),
> 
> See also creat04 for example.
> 
>> +
>>   	fd = SAFE_CREAT(CREAT_FILE, MODE_SGID);
>>   	SAFE_CLOSE(fd);
>>   	file_test(CREAT_FILE);
>> @@ -115,13 +128,14 @@ static void cleanup(void)
>>   }
>>   
>>   static struct tst_test test = {
>> -	.test_all = run,
>> +	.test = run,
>>   	.setup = setup,
>>   	.cleanup = cleanup,
>>   	.needs_root = 1,
>>   	.all_filesystems = 1,
>>   	.mount_device = 1,
>>   	.mntpoint = MNTPOINT,
>> +	.tcnt = 2,
>>   	.skip_filesystems = (const char*[]) {
>>   		"exfat",
>>   		"ntfs",
>> @@ -132,6 +146,7 @@ static struct tst_test test = {
>>   		{"linux-git", "0fa3ecd87848"},
>>   		{"CVE", "2018-13405"},
>>   		{"linux-git", "01ea173e103e"},
>> +		{"linux-git", "1639a49ccdce"},
>>   		{}
>>   	},
>>   };
> 
>