From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BD6D1DE3A5 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2025 18:32:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743445953; cv=none; b=V+MkUsa/7j4Nf9L1L989AEsNgCfmJic09gVDxKnmefzMxRyuaNA6/Tz3icWhafjGhKehlu9BsVi7JVXpiI2Niz8f/mHMxMU/Xh1FICt/c28cBBKS91gzC7CdNqlh38Vb7SnUvA8u2QtwF2hvU6ZaVBUOH+wSVsJDuJqVnfEZVfU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743445953; c=relaxed/simple; bh=BJkQvthlNtH6auAfO4lCrhO/pF8mIIMYSy9yIE1FvhA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=AvjTIeAle3kNez79hWa88lt9aIYYiPHME6kmB+1QpBwxpk4eeZxM+oMEdI5MXSP6fxVgYdKuWW+UFb1TWPUxlLpkcLGuZoUChRoNO4SOQrLkvyDliODTwVwYe7PICLQ9UvY/10O0Kce99FLIAx8CbMEYVQmBbxNYzyM7+PmW+e8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=i0GOUGAA; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=X1d6dPsT; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=i0GOUGAA; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=X1d6dPsT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="i0GOUGAA"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="X1d6dPsT"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="i0GOUGAA"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="X1d6dPsT" Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 247FC211E5; Mon, 31 Mar 2025 18:32:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1743445949; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Wv4Lmp/QdqT0c2+FR1HowIaSrO31qTK8wTqkhmeumIM=; b=i0GOUGAANFCukQk7qUtG8rRgjDslM1onbc4kxUYe/+TzRx7kDpG+mekMyDWQIr0wSeald4 nmgVakNm2GqL2ZZ7KsmJkqwT+815zoAx9S9Kc9RvBnq/4eeK7BoeaCFL6sS14vN4bHjbv4 ky2kQ3P1MGetLjxxeV1WgfgF7q2jL3M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1743445949; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Wv4Lmp/QdqT0c2+FR1HowIaSrO31qTK8wTqkhmeumIM=; b=X1d6dPsT3JjGcL6NA2t05gmqWKWpTJR9ZrJIAlIR8fmw1ockgY8pne3WpIAnrFUVUdlCqG kXAOWb/l1njC+KBQ== Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=i0GOUGAA; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=X1d6dPsT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1743445949; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Wv4Lmp/QdqT0c2+FR1HowIaSrO31qTK8wTqkhmeumIM=; b=i0GOUGAANFCukQk7qUtG8rRgjDslM1onbc4kxUYe/+TzRx7kDpG+mekMyDWQIr0wSeald4 nmgVakNm2GqL2ZZ7KsmJkqwT+815zoAx9S9Kc9RvBnq/4eeK7BoeaCFL6sS14vN4bHjbv4 ky2kQ3P1MGetLjxxeV1WgfgF7q2jL3M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1743445949; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Wv4Lmp/QdqT0c2+FR1HowIaSrO31qTK8wTqkhmeumIM=; b=X1d6dPsT3JjGcL6NA2t05gmqWKWpTJR9ZrJIAlIR8fmw1ockgY8pne3WpIAnrFUVUdlCqG kXAOWb/l1njC+KBQ== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0E64139A1; Mon, 31 Mar 2025 18:32:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id OCvpOLzf6meXBAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Mon, 31 Mar 2025 18:32:28 +0000 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 20:32:27 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: lufei Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] unshare_test: set nr_open using soft limit Message-ID: <20250331183227.GA279891@pevik> Reply-To: Petr Vorel References: <20250328144717.108054-1-lufei@uniontech.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250328144717.108054-1-lufei@uniontech.com> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 247FC211E5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.71 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo,imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:rdns,suse.cz:replyto,suse.cz:dkim,suse.cz:email]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.cz:+]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; ASN(0.00)[asn:25478, ipnet:::/0, country:RU]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Spam-Score: -3.71 X-Spam-Flag: NO Hi all, > Set maximum file descriptor number limit by rlimit.rlim_max than > nr_open(hard limit). Hard limit may cause dup2 fail. It actually changes from failure: # ./unshare_test TAP version 13 1..1 # Starting 1 tests from 1 test cases. # RUN global.unshare_EMFILE ... # unshare_test.c:60:unshare_EMFILE:Expected dup2(2, nr_open + 64) (-1) >= 0 (0) # unshare_EMFILE: Test failed # FAIL global.unshare_EMFILE not ok 1 global.unshare_EMFILE # FAILED: 0 / 1 tests passed. # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0 to pass: TAP version 13 1..1 # Starting 1 tests from 1 test cases. # RUN global.unshare_EMFILE ... # OK global.unshare_EMFILE ok 1 global.unshare_EMFILE # PASSED: 1 / 1 tests passed. # Totals: pass:1 fail:0 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0 > Signed-off-by: lufei > --- > tools/testing/selftests/core/unshare_test.c | 28 +++++++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/core/unshare_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/core/unshare_test.c > index 7fec9dfb1b0e..2c4e7104b0d9 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/core/unshare_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/core/unshare_test.c > @@ -26,10 +26,11 @@ TEST(unshare_EMFILE) > .exit_signal = SIGCHLD, > }; > int fd; > - ssize_t n, n2; > - static char buf[512], buf2[512]; > + ssize_t n, n2, n3; > + static char buf[512], buf2[512], buf3[512]; > struct rlimit rlimit; > int nr_open; > + int rlimit_max; > fd = open("/proc/sys/fs/nr_open", O_RDWR); > ASSERT_GE(fd, 0); > @@ -42,22 +43,24 @@ TEST(unshare_EMFILE) > ASSERT_EQ(0, getrlimit(RLIMIT_NOFILE, &rlimit)); > - /* bump fs.nr_open */ > - n2 = sprintf(buf2, "%d\n", nr_open + 1024); > + rlimit_max = rlimit.rlim_max; > + > + /* bump rlimit.rlim_max */ > + n2 = sprintf(buf2, "%d\n", rlimit_max + 1024); > lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_SET); > write(fd, buf2, n2); > /* bump ulimit -n */ > - rlimit.rlim_cur = nr_open + 1024; > - rlimit.rlim_max = nr_open + 1024; > + rlimit.rlim_cur = rlimit_max + 1024; > + rlimit.rlim_max = rlimit_max + 1024; > EXPECT_EQ(0, setrlimit(RLIMIT_NOFILE, &rlimit)) { > lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_SET); > write(fd, buf, n); > exit(EXIT_FAILURE); > } > - /* get a descriptor past the old fs.nr_open */ > - EXPECT_GE(dup2(2, nr_open + 64), 0) { > + /* get a descriptor past the old rlimit.rlim_max */ > + EXPECT_GE(dup2(2, rlimit_max + 64), 0) { > lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_SET); > write(fd, buf, n); > exit(EXIT_FAILURE); > @@ -74,15 +77,20 @@ TEST(unshare_EMFILE) > if (pid == 0) { > int err; > - /* restore fs.nr_open */ > + n3 = sprintf(buf3, "%d\n", rlimit_max); > lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_SET); > - write(fd, buf, n); > + write(fd, buf3, n3); nit: do we really need buf3? Can't we reuse buf2? Or do I miss something obvious? Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel Kind regards, Petr > + > /* ... and now unshare(CLONE_FILES) must fail with EMFILE */ > err = unshare(CLONE_FILES); > EXPECT_EQ(err, -1) > exit(EXIT_FAILURE); > EXPECT_EQ(errno, EMFILE) > exit(EXIT_FAILURE); > + > + /* restore fs.nr_open */ > + lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_SET); > + write(fd, buf, n); > exit(EXIT_SUCCESS); > }