From: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
To: zhouyuhang <zhouyuhang1010@163.com>,
brauner@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
zhouyuhang <zhouyuhang@kylinos.cn>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: clone3: Use the capget and capset syscall directly
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 16:38:23 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0f79692e-ed68-462d-8ec7-955219116282@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <714162ff-a2f8-4fc6-91af-0ecd6376bc7f@163.com>
On 10/12/24 02:28, zhouyuhang wrote:
>
> On 2024/10/11 22:21, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 10/11/24 00:59, zhouyuhang wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2024/10/10 23:50, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/24 06:16, zhouyuhang wrote:
>>>>> From: zhouyuhang <zhouyuhang@kylinos.cn>
>>>>>
>>>>> The libcap commit aca076443591 ("Make cap_t operations thread safe.") added a
>>>>> __u8 mutex at the beginning of the struct _cap_struct,it changes the offset of
>>>>> the members in the structure that breaks the assumption made in the "struct libcap"
>>>>> definition in clone3_cap_checkpoint_restore.c.So use the capget and capset syscall
>>>>> directly and remove the libcap library dependency like the commit 663af70aabb7
>>>>> ("bpf: selftests: Add helpers to directly use the capget and capset syscall") does.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NIT: grammar and comma spacing. Please fix those for readability.
>>>> e.g: Change "struct _cap_struct,it" to "struct _cap_struct, it"
>>>> Fix others as well.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks, I'll fix it in V2
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: zhouyuhang <zhouyuhang@kylinos.cn>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> tools/testing/selftests/clone3/Makefile | 1 -
>>>>> .../clone3/clone3_cap_checkpoint_restore.c | 60 +++++++++----------
>>>>> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/clone3/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/clone3/Makefile
>>>>> index 84832c369a2e..59d26e8da8d2 100644
>>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/clone3/Makefile
>>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/clone3/Makefile
>>>>> @@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
>>>>> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>>>>> CFLAGS += -g -std=gnu99 $(KHDR_INCLUDES)
>>>>> -LDLIBS += -lcap
>>>>> TEST_GEN_PROGS := clone3 clone3_clear_sighand clone3_set_tid \
>>>>> clone3_cap_checkpoint_restore
>>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/clone3/clone3_cap_checkpoint_restore.c b/tools/testing/selftests/clone3/clone3_cap_checkpoint_restore.c
>>>>> index 3c196fa86c99..111912e2aead 100644
>>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/clone3/clone3_cap_checkpoint_restore.c
>>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/clone3/clone3_cap_checkpoint_restore.c
>>>>> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
>>>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>>>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>>>> #include <stdbool.h>
>>>>> -#include <sys/capability.h>
>>>>> +#include <linux/capability.h>
>>>>> #include <sys/prctl.h>
>>>>> #include <sys/syscall.h>
>>>>> #include <sys/types.h>
>>>>> @@ -27,6 +27,13 @@
>>>>> #include "../kselftest_harness.h"
>>>>> #include "clone3_selftests.h"
>>>>> +#ifndef CAP_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE
>>>>> +#define CAP_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE 40
>>>>> +#endif
>>>>> +
>>>>
>>>> Why is this necessary? This is defined in linux/capability.h.
>>>>
>>>>> +int capget(cap_user_header_t header, cap_user_data_t data);
>>>>> +int capset(cap_user_header_t header, const cap_user_data_t data);
>>>>
>>>> In general prototypes such as these should be defined in header
>>>> file. Why are we defining these here?
>>>>
>>>> These are defined in sys/capability.h
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand this change. You are removing sys/capability.h
>>>> which requires you to add these defines here. This doesn't
>>>> sound like a correct solution to me.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I tested it on my machine without libcap-dev installed, the /usr/include/linux/capability.h
>>>
>>> is on this machine by default. Successfully compiled using #include <linux/capability.h>
>>>
>>> but not with #include <sys/capability.h>. This patch removes libcap library dependencies.
>>>
>>> And we don't use any part of sys/capability.h other than these two syscalls. So I think that's why it's necessary.
>>
>> You are changing the code to not include sys/capability.h
>> What happens if sys/capability.h along with linux/capability.h
>>
>> Do you see problems?
>>
>
> I'm sorry, maybe I wasn't clear enough.
> When we install the libcap library it will have the following output:
>
> test@test:~/work/libcap$ sudo make install | grep capability
> install -m 0644 include/sys/capability.h /usr/include/sys
> install -m 0644 include/sys/capability.h /usr/include/sys
> /usr/share/man/man5 capability.conf.5 \
>
> It installs sys/capability.h in the correct location, but does not
>
> install linux/capability.h, so sys/capability.h is bound to the libcap library
It won't install inux/capability.h unless you run "make headers" in
the kernel repo.
>
> and they will either exist or disappear together. Now I want to remove
>
> the dependency of the test on libcap library so I changed the code that it
>
> does not contain sys/capability.h but instead linux/capability.h,
>
> so that the test can compile successfully without libcap being installed,
>
> these two syscalls are not declared in linux/capability.h(It is sufficient for test use except for these two syscalls)
>
> so we need to declare them here. I think that's why the commit 663af70aabb7
>
> ("bpf: selftests: Add helpers to directly use the capget and capset syscall") I refered to
>
> does the same thing. As for your question "What happens if sys/capability.h along
>
> with linux/capability.h", I haven't found the problem yet, I sincerely hope you can
>
> help me improve this code. Thank you very much.
Try this:
Run make headers in the kernel repo.
Build without making any changes.
Then add you changes and add linux/capability.h to include files
Tell me what happens.
The change you are making isn't correct. Because you don't want to
define system calls locally in your source file.
thanks,
-- Shuah
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-14 22:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-10 12:16 [PATCH] selftests: clone3: Use the capget and capset syscall directly zhouyuhang
2024-10-10 15:50 ` Shuah Khan
2024-10-11 6:59 ` zhouyuhang
2024-10-11 14:21 ` Shuah Khan
2024-10-12 8:28 ` zhouyuhang
2024-10-14 22:38 ` Shuah Khan [this message]
2024-10-15 9:00 ` zhouyuhang
2024-10-15 15:23 ` Shuah Khan
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=0f79692e-ed68-462d-8ec7-955219116282@linuxfoundation.org \
--to=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=zhouyuhang1010@163.com \
--cc=zhouyuhang@kylinos.cn \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox