Re: [PATCH] selftests/seccomp: Accept any valid fd in user_notification_addfd

[Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>]

On 1/28/21 9:17 AM, Seth Forshee wrote:
> This test expects fds to have specific values, which works fine
> when the test is run standalone. However, the kselftest runner
> consumes a couple of extra fds for redirection when running
> tests, so the test fails when run via kselftest.
> 
> Change the test to pass on any valid fd number.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>
> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 8 ++------
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> index 26c72f2b61b1..9338df6f4ca8 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> @@ -4019,18 +4019,14 @@ TEST(user_notification_addfd)
>   
>   	/* Verify we can set an arbitrary remote fd */
>   	fd = ioctl(listener, SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_ADDFD, &addfd);
> -	/*
> -	 * The child has fds 0(stdin), 1(stdout), 2(stderr), 3(memfd),
> -	 * 4(listener), so the newly allocated fd should be 5.
> -	 */
> -	EXPECT_EQ(fd, 5);
> +	EXPECT_GE(fd, 0);
>   	EXPECT_EQ(filecmp(getpid(), pid, memfd, fd), 0);
>   
>   	/* Verify we can set an arbitrary remote fd with large size */
>   	memset(&big, 0x0, sizeof(big));
>   	big.addfd = addfd;
>   	fd = ioctl(listener, SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_ADDFD_BIG, &big);
> -	EXPECT_EQ(fd, 6);
> +	EXPECT_GE(fd, 0);
>   
>   	/* Verify we can set a specific remote fd */
>   	addfd.newfd = 42;
> 

Here is my Ack if Kees wants to take it through seccomp.

Acked-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

thanks,
-- Shuah