From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20204C43458 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 12:03:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB6573E287A for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 14:03:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (in-7.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 472713E1F82 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 14:02:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 997E820012E for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 14:02:51 +0200 (CEST) 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-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5956976494; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 12:02:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1783684970; h=from:from: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=lDijSv+OtUfvx1RP7clksIXtYJKnPKLddHlyF2qjg1g=; b=VyWwSpApzEkPHy5y7CNyaD6AQoPaJLl48GQdhazCGu2udm2Nmga24euybSS/BCCTKwe8Dn sGoVZpVBryT4/3+XqTPyQvICGvl8NvSxb9Zl+dEf91p0TNeuC7am2if4UOG1PKD2j3nV2c E7n0WxU2b9DfGWK6xJPIJ6oZQxDb6lk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1783684970; h=from:from: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=lDijSv+OtUfvx1RP7clksIXtYJKnPKLddHlyF2qjg1g=; b=PedF4cBCoK9BISoHWugR+vNlyjDq41Lnb5uzPuCCSvQ+deL1tRn1lR2EK8d60JUbB8K/vH E73Nm8XeAmwW+YDg== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=VyWwSpAp; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=PedF4cBC DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1783684970; h=from:from: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=lDijSv+OtUfvx1RP7clksIXtYJKnPKLddHlyF2qjg1g=; b=VyWwSpApzEkPHy5y7CNyaD6AQoPaJLl48GQdhazCGu2udm2Nmga24euybSS/BCCTKwe8Dn sGoVZpVBryT4/3+XqTPyQvICGvl8NvSxb9Zl+dEf91p0TNeuC7am2if4UOG1PKD2j3nV2c E7n0WxU2b9DfGWK6xJPIJ6oZQxDb6lk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1783684970; h=from:from: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=lDijSv+OtUfvx1RP7clksIXtYJKnPKLddHlyF2qjg1g=; b=PedF4cBCoK9BISoHWugR+vNlyjDq41Lnb5uzPuCCSvQ+deL1tRn1lR2EK8d60JUbB8K/vH E73Nm8XeAmwW+YDg== 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 43049779BE; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 12:02:50 +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 OfeaD2rfUGoFNwAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Fri, 10 Jul 2026 12:02:50 +0000 Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 14:02:04 +0200 From: Cyril Hrubis To: Jan Polensky Message-ID: References: <20260709175927.268677-1-japo@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.01 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; 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]; RBL_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; FUZZY_RATELIMITED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DNSWL_BLOCKED(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167:received,2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167:received]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.cz:+]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.cz:email, suse.cz:dkim, imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo, imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:rdns] X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5956976494 X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.9 at in-7.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v6 1/1] thp04: Add ptrace mode and fix tracee stop synchronization X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi! > That's a fair point. > > The main goal was to keep thp04 functional on kernels with > CONFIG_PROC_MEM_FORCE_PTRACE=y, where direct writes via /proc/self/mem > are no longer possible. > > Do you have a preference for how support for that configuration should > look? > > Would you prefer: > > 1. Keeping thp04 focused on the original race test and skipping it > when only ptrace-based writes are available? > > 2. Splitting the ptrace write validation into a separate testcase and > leaving thp04 unchanged? > > 3. Some other approach? 1 + 2 please. The thp04 is a CVE regression test, if there is no chance to trigger the CVE it should just report TCONF. > I'm mostly trying to understand the intended coverage for > CONFIG_PROC_MEM_FORCE_PTRACE=y before making further changes. For that we should add tests under testcases/syscalls/ptrace/. I suppose that we need a test that would check that the process cannot modify itself when that config option is enabled. And another test that would validate that parent can access child memory. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp