[LTP] [PATCH v3] munlockall: add test case that verifies memory has been unlocked
Dennis Brendel
dbrendel@redhat.com
Thu Mar 7 08:36:13 CET 2024
Hi Cyril,
On 3/6/24 16:26, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
> Hi!
>> +/*\
>> + * [Description]
>> + *
>> + * Verify that munlockall(2) unlocks all previously locked memory
>> + */
>>
>> -char *TCID = "munlockall01";
>> -int TST_TOTAL = 1;
>> +#include <sys/mman.h>
>>
>> -#if !defined(UCLINUX)
>> +#include "tst_test.h"
>>
>> -int main(int ac, char **av)
>> +static void verify_munlockall(void)
>> {
>> - int lc;
>> -
>> - tst_parse_opts(ac, av, NULL, NULL);
>> + unsigned long size = 0;
>>
>> - setup();
>> + SAFE_FILE_LINES_SCANF("/proc/self/status", "VmLck: %ld", &size);
>>
>> - /* check looping state */
>> - for (lc = 0; TEST_LOOPING(lc); lc++) {
>> + if (size != 0UL)
>> + tst_brk(TBROK, "Locked memory after init should be 0 but is %ld", size);
>>
>> - tst_count = 0;
>> + if (mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE) != 0)
>> + tst_brk(TBROK | TERRNO, "Could not lock memory using mlockall()");
>>
>> - TEST(munlockall());
>> + SAFE_FILE_LINES_SCANF("/proc/self/status", "VmLck: %ld", &size);
>>
>> - /* check return code */
>> - if (TEST_RETURN == -1) {
>> - tst_resm(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "munlockall() Failed with"
>> - " return=%ld", TEST_RETURN);
>> - } else {
>> - tst_resm(TPASS, "munlockall() passed with"
>> - " return=%ld ", TEST_RETURN);
>> + if (size == 0UL)
>> + tst_brk(TBROK, "Locked memory after mlockall() should be greater than 0, "
>> + "but is %ld", size);
>
> This line can be shorter:
>
> tst_brk(TBROK, "After mlockall() locked memory should be >0");
>
> We already checked that size is 0 so no need to print it.
Agreed :-)
>> - }
>> - }
>> + if (munlockall() != 0)
>> + tst_brk(TBROK | TERRNO, "Could not unlock memory using munlockall()");
>
> We are testing the munlockall() syscall here so it would be better to
> use the TST_EXP_PASS() macro.
The actual purpose of the test was not checking the return value of the syscall
(wrapper), but the behavior as reported by the kernel through /proc - but fair
enough, it does not do any harm :-)
>> - /* cleanup and exit */
>> - cleanup();
>> - tst_exit();
>> + SAFE_FILE_LINES_SCANF("/proc/self/status", "VmLck: %ld", &size);
>>
>> + if (size != 0UL)
>> + tst_res(TFAIL, "Locked memory after munlockall() should be 0 but is %ld", size);
>> +
>> + else
>> + tst_res(TPASS, "Memory successfully locked and unlocked");
>> }
>>
>> -#else
>> -
>> -int main(void)
>> -{
>> - tst_resm(TINFO, "test is not available on uClinux");
>> - tst_exit();
>> -}
>> -
>> -#endif /* if !defined(UCLINUX) */
>> -
>> -/* setup() - performs all ONE TIME setup for this test. */
>> -void setup(void)
>> -{
>> - tst_require_root();
>> -
>> - tst_sig(NOFORK, DEF_HANDLER, cleanup);
>> -
>> - TEST_PAUSE;
>> -}
>> -
>> -/*
>> - * cleanup() - performs all ONE TIME cleanup for this test at
>> - * completion or premature exit.
>> - */
>> -void cleanup(void)
>> -{
>> -}
>> +static struct tst_test test = {
>> + .test_all = verify_munlockall,
>> +};
>> --
>> 2.44.0
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
>
More information about the ltp
mailing list