[LTP] Re [PATCH] syscalls/sched_setscheduler04: new test for sched_setscheduler()
zhaogongyi
zhaogongyi@huawei.com
Mon Nov 14 12:13:28 CET 2022
Hi!
> > >> > +static void test_sched_setscheduler02(void) {
> >> > + pthread_t tid;
> >> > +
> >> > + SAFE_PTHREAD_CREATE(&tid, NULL, thread_func, NULL);
> >> > + SAFE_PTHREAD_JOIN(tid, NULL);
> >> > +}
> >> > +
> >> > +
> >> > +static void run(void)
> >> > +{
> >> > + sched_prio = sched_get_priority_min(SCHED_POLICY);
> >>
> >> This can go in the setup function.
> >
> > If move it to setup function, we run the test with option "-I 200", it
> > will fail.
>
> Why?
sched_prio is a global variable, and it increase in any running loop, thus it will be out of range and report:
sched_setscheduler04.c:52: TPASS: param.sched_priority == sched_prio (99)
sched_setscheduler04.c:53: TPASS: new_policy == EXP_POLICY (1)
sched_setscheduler04.c:34: TINFO: Setting of tid: 70774
sched_setscheduler04.c:40: TBROK: sched_setscheduler(70774, 1, ...) failed: EINVAL (22)
Summary:
passed 196
failed 0
broken 1
skipped 0
warnings 0
> >
> >>
> >> > +
> >> > + test_sched_setscheduler01();
> >> > + test_sched_setscheduler02();
> >>
> >> This should be replaced with .tcnt = 2 and .test. or else just merge
> >> them into run.
> >
> > Agree, I will fix it int the next version.
> >
> >>
> >> > +}
> >> > +
> >> > +static struct tst_test test = {
> >> > + .test_all = run,
> >>
> >> We probably need to ensure CAP_SYS_NICE. Full details are in 'man 7
> >> sched'
> >>
> >> i.e. .caps = (struct tst_cap[]) {
> >> TST_CAP(TST_CAP_REQ, CAP_SYS_NICE),
> >> null
> >> }
> >>
> >
> > In this testcase, we just increase the priority, should we add the checking
> of capability?
>
> For the test to run we need CAP_SYS_NICE. If you want to test that the
> priority can only be set when CAP_SYS_NICE is available, then that is a
> seperate test in my opinion.
Anybody can call nice() to increase the priority, i have test it with normal user and passed.
And if decrease the priority, the test will report EPERM when running with normal user.
Regards,
Gongyi
More information about the ltp
mailing list