All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: lufei <lufei@uniontech.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] unshare03: using soft limit of NOFILE
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 11:33:36 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250327103336.GA70364@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250314044257.1673303-1-lufei@uniontech.com>

Hi lufei, Al,

@Al, you're the author of the original test unshare_test.c [1] in kselftest.
This is a patch to LTP test unshare03.c, which is based on your test.

> I think it's safer to set NOFILE increasing from soft limit than from
> hard limit.

> Hard limit may lead to dup2 ENOMEM error which bring the result to
> TBROK on little memory machine. (e.g. 2GB memory in my situation, hard
> limit in /proc/sys/fs/nr_open come out to be 1073741816)

IMHO lowering number to ~ half (in my case) by using rlimit.rlim_max instead of
/proc/sys/fs/nr_open should not affect the functionality of the test, right?
Or am I missing something obvious?

@lufei I guess kselftest tools/testing/selftests/core/unshare_test.c would fail
for you as well, right?

Kind regards,
Petr

[1] https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=611fbeb44a777e5ab54ab3127ec85f72147911d8

> Signed-off-by: lufei <lufei@uniontech.com>
> ---
>  testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c | 14 ++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c
> index 7c5e71c4e..bb568264c 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c
> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@

>  static void run(void)
>  {
> -	int nr_open;
> +	int rlim_max;
>  	int nr_limit;
>  	struct rlimit rlimit;
>  	struct tst_clone_args args = {
> @@ -32,14 +32,12 @@ static void run(void)
>  		.exit_signal = SIGCHLD,
>  	};

> -	SAFE_FILE_SCANF(FS_NR_OPEN, "%d", &nr_open);
> -	tst_res(TDEBUG, "Maximum number of file descriptors: %d", nr_open);
> +	SAFE_GETRLIMIT(RLIMIT_NOFILE, &rlimit);
> +	rlim_max = rlimit.rlim_max;

> -	nr_limit = nr_open + NR_OPEN_LIMIT;
> +	nr_limit = rlim_max + NR_OPEN_LIMIT;
>  	SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(FS_NR_OPEN, "%d", nr_limit);

> -	SAFE_GETRLIMIT(RLIMIT_NOFILE, &rlimit);
> -
>  	rlimit.rlim_cur = nr_limit;
>  	rlimit.rlim_max = nr_limit;

> @@ -47,10 +45,10 @@ static void run(void)
>  	tst_res(TDEBUG, "Set new maximum number of file descriptors to : %d",
>  		nr_limit);

> -	SAFE_DUP2(2, nr_open + NR_OPEN_DUP);
> +	SAFE_DUP2(2, rlim_max + NR_OPEN_DUP);

>  	if (!SAFE_CLONE(&args)) {
> -		SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(FS_NR_OPEN, "%d", nr_open);
> +		SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(FS_NR_OPEN, "%d", rlim_max);
>  		TST_EXP_FAIL(unshare(CLONE_FILES), EMFILE);
>  		exit(0);
>  	}

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

  reply	other threads:[~2025-03-27 10:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-14  4:42 [LTP] [PATCH] unshare03: using soft limit of NOFILE lufei
2025-03-27 10:33 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
     [not found]   ` <0A99FFBB46DDB0B4+Z+YKSlAwn1vx3Dz4@rocky>
2025-03-28  8:50     ` Petr Vorel
2025-04-01 10:11 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-04-01 12:54   ` Petr Vorel
2025-04-01 13:55     ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-04-09  6:41   ` Lu Fei
2025-04-09  7:49 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2] unshare03: set nr_open with sizeof(long)*8 lufei
2025-04-10 15:35   ` Jan Stancek via ltp
2025-04-11  3:09   ` Li Wang via ltp
2025-04-11  3:21     ` Li Wang via ltp
2025-04-11  6:01       ` Lu Fei
2025-04-11  9:03         ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-04-11  9:30   ` [LTP] [PATCH v3] " lufei
2025-04-16  1:55     ` Li Wang via ltp

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20250327103336.GA70364@pevik \
    --to=pvorel@suse.cz \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    --cc=lufei@uniontech.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.