[LTP] [PATCH] fix "sched_getparam/6-1" and "sched_getscheduler/7-1" tests

[LTP] [PATCH] fix "sched_getparam/6-1" and "sched_getscheduler/7-1" tests

[Mitani]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2354 bytes --]

Hi,


Following POSIX testsets failed:
------------
conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1: execution: FAILED: Output:
Testing with user 'bin' (euid: 1)(uid: 1)
The function sched_getparam has successed.
------------

------------
conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7-1: execution: FAILED: Output:
Testing with user 'bin' (uid: 1)
The function sched_getscheduler has successed.
------------

The environments are as follows:
  - RHEL4.8 --- (x86, x86_64, ia64)
  - kernel  --- kernel-2.6.9-89.EL
  - glibc   --- glibc-2.3.4-2.43

  - RHEL5.5 --- (x86, x86_64, ia64)
  - kernel  --- kernel-2.6.18-194.el5
  - glibc   --- glibc-2.5-49


They are permission tests.

The comment of "sched_getparam/6-1" testset source is as follows:
------------
  * On Linux, e.g, the kernel makes no check on user permission to call this
  * API. So basically we don't know on what condition a system should return
  * EPERM. It is implementation defined.
------------


Therefore I revised their results to "UNRESOLVED" by judging linux
environment.

Signed-off-by: Tomonori Mitani <mitani@ryobi.co.jp>
============
---
a/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1.c
2010-12-08 15:39:45.000000000 +0900
+++
b/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1.c
2010-12-08 13:48:51.000000000 +0900
@@ -65,6 +65,11 @@
 	struct sched_param param;
 	int result = -1;
 
+#ifdef __linux__
+	printf("We don't know on what condition a system should return
EPERM.\n");
+        return PTS_UNRESOLVED;
+#endif
+
 	/* We assume process Number 1 is created by root */
 	/* and can only be accessed by root */ 
 	/* This test should be run under standard user permissions */
============

============
---
a/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7
-1.c	2010-11-12 02:19:16.000000000 +0900
+++
b/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7
-1.c	2010-12-08 15:42:23.000000000 +0900
@@ -55,6 +55,11 @@
 
 	int result = -1;
 
+#ifdef __linux__
+	printf("We don't know on what condition a system should return
EPERM.\n");
+	return PTS_UNRESOLVED;
+#endif
+
 	/* We assume process Number 1 is created by root */
 	/* and can only be accessed by root */ 
 	/* This test should be run under standard user permissions */
============



Regards--

-Tomonori Mitani

[-- Attachment #2: 7-1.patch --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 588 bytes --]

--- a/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7-1.c	2010-11-12 02:19:16.000000000 +0900
+++ b/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7-1.c	2010-12-08 15:42:23.000000000 +0900
@@ -55,6 +55,11 @@
 
 	int result = -1;
 
+#ifdef __linux__
+	printf("We don't know on what condition a system should return EPERM.\n");
+	return PTS_UNRESOLVED;
+#endif
+
 	/* We assume process Number 1 is created by root */
 	/* and can only be accessed by root */ 
 	/* This test should be run under standard user permissions */

[-- Attachment #3: 6-1.patch --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 613 bytes --]

--- a/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1.c	2010-12-08 15:39:45.000000000 +0900
+++ b/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1.c	2010-12-08 13:48:51.000000000 +0900
@@ -65,6 +65,11 @@
 	struct sched_param param;
 	int result = -1;
 
+#ifdef __linux__
+	printf("We don't know on what condition a system should return EPERM.\n");
+        return PTS_UNRESOLVED;
+#endif
+
 	/* We assume process Number 1 is created by root */
 	/* and can only be accessed by root */ 
 	/* This test should be run under standard user permissions */

[-- Attachment #4: Type: text/plain, Size: 450 bytes --]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another costly 
upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time to move
off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier to build,
use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the Lotus 
Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d

[-- Attachment #5: Type: text/plain, Size: 155 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix "sched_getparam/6-1" and "sched_getscheduler/7-1" tests

[Bian Naimeng]

Mitani wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 
> Following POSIX testsets failed:
> ------------
> conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1: execution: FAILED: Output:
> Testing with user 'bin' (euid: 1)(uid: 1)
> The function sched_getparam has successed.
> ------------
> 
> ------------
> conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7-1: execution: FAILED: Output:
> Testing with user 'bin' (uid: 1)
> The function sched_getscheduler has successed.
> ------------
> 
> The environments are as follows:
>   - RHEL4.8 --- (x86, x86_64, ia64)
>   - kernel  --- kernel-2.6.9-89.EL
>   - glibc   --- glibc-2.3.4-2.43
> 
>   - RHEL5.5 --- (x86, x86_64, ia64)
>   - kernel  --- kernel-2.6.18-194.el5
>   - glibc   --- glibc-2.5-49
> 
> 
> They are permission tests.
> 
> The comment of "sched_getparam/6-1" testset source is as follows:
> ------------
>   * On Linux, e.g, the kernel makes no check on user permission to call this
>   * API. So basically we don't know on what condition a system should return
>   * EPERM. It is implementation defined.
> ------------
> 

Hi Garrett,

 I think it's better to report UNRESOLVED, whatever the os is.

Regards
 Bian

> 
> Therefore I revised their results to "UNRESOLVED" by judging linux
> environment.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tomonori Mitani <mitani@ryobi.co.jp>
> ============
> ---
> a/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1.c
> 2010-12-08 15:39:45.000000000 +0900
> +++
> b/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1.c
> 2010-12-08 13:48:51.000000000 +0900
> @@ -65,6 +65,11 @@
>  	struct sched_param param;
>  	int result = -1;
>  
> +#ifdef __linux__
> +	printf("We don't know on what condition a system should return
> EPERM.\n");
> +        return PTS_UNRESOLVED;
> +#endif
> +
>  	/* We assume process Number 1 is created by root */
>  	/* and can only be accessed by root */ 
>  	/* This test should be run under standard user permissions */
> ============
> 
> ============
> ---
> a/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7
> -1.c	2010-11-12 02:19:16.000000000 +0900
> +++
> b/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7
> -1.c	2010-12-08 15:42:23.000000000 +0900
> @@ -55,6 +55,11 @@
>  
>  	int result = -1;
>  
> +#ifdef __linux__
> +	printf("We don't know on what condition a system should return
> EPERM.\n");
> +	return PTS_UNRESOLVED;
> +#endif
> +
>  	/* We assume process Number 1 is created by root */
>  	/* and can only be accessed by root */ 
>  	/* This test should be run under standard user permissions */
> ============
> 
> 
> 
> Regards--
> 
> -Tomonori Mitani
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What happens now with your Lotus Notes apps - do you make another costly 
> upgrade, or settle for being marooned without product support? Time to move
> off Lotus Notes and onto the cloud with Force.com, apps are easier to build,
> use, and manage than apps on traditional platforms. Sign up for the Lotus 
> Notes Migration Kit to learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/salesforce-d2d
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ltp-list mailing list
> Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

-- 
Regards
Bian Naimeng


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)!
Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free!
Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires 
February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix "sched_getparam/6-1" and "sched_getscheduler/7-1" tests

[Garrett Cooper]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Bian Naimeng <biannm@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>
> Mitani wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> Following POSIX testsets failed:
>> ------------
>> conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1: execution: FAILED: Output:
>> Testing with user 'bin' (euid: 1)(uid: 1)
>> The function sched_getparam has successed.
>> ------------
>>
>> ------------
>> conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7-1: execution: FAILED: Output:
>> Testing with user 'bin' (uid: 1)
>> The function sched_getscheduler has successed.
>> ------------
>>
>> The environments are as follows:
>>   - RHEL4.8 --- (x86, x86_64, ia64)
>>   - kernel  --- kernel-2.6.9-89.EL
>>   - glibc   --- glibc-2.3.4-2.43
>>
>>   - RHEL5.5 --- (x86, x86_64, ia64)
>>   - kernel  --- kernel-2.6.18-194.el5
>>   - glibc   --- glibc-2.5-49
>>
>>
>> They are permission tests.
>>
>> The comment of "sched_getparam/6-1" testset source is as follows:
>> ------------
>>   * On Linux, e.g, the kernel makes no check on user permission to call this
>>   * API. So basically we don't know on what condition a system should return
>>   * EPERM. It is implementation defined.
>> ------------
>>
>
> Hi Garrett,
>
>  I think it's better to report UNRESOLVED, whatever the os is.

    It's not implementation defined according to 2008.1, and it's flat
out a requirement failure (not UNRESOLVED):

The sched_getparam() function shall fail if:

[EPERM]
    The requesting process does not have permission to obtain the
scheduling parameters of the specified process.

`shall' -> `must' in POSIX terms.

    The test is incorrect because it fails to setgid the group to the
non-root user's group.
Thanks,
-Garrett

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)!
Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free!
Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires 
February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix "sched_getparam/6-1" and "sched_getscheduler/7-1" tests

[Bian Naimeng]

Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Bian Naimeng <biannm@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>
>> Mitani wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> Following POSIX testsets failed:
>>> ------------
>>> conformance/interfaces/sched_getparam/6-1: execution: FAILED: Output:
>>> Testing with user 'bin' (euid: 1)(uid: 1)
>>> The function sched_getparam has successed.
>>> ------------
>>>
>>> ------------
>>> conformance/interfaces/sched_getscheduler/7-1: execution: FAILED: Output:
>>> Testing with user 'bin' (uid: 1)
>>> The function sched_getscheduler has successed.
>>> ------------
>>>
>>> The environments are as follows:
>>>   - RHEL4.8 --- (x86, x86_64, ia64)
>>>   - kernel  --- kernel-2.6.9-89.EL
>>>   - glibc   --- glibc-2.3.4-2.43
>>>
>>>   - RHEL5.5 --- (x86, x86_64, ia64)
>>>   - kernel  --- kernel-2.6.18-194.el5
>>>   - glibc   --- glibc-2.5-49
>>>
>>>
>>> They are permission tests.
>>>
>>> The comment of "sched_getparam/6-1" testset source is as follows:
>>> ------------
>>>   * On Linux, e.g, the kernel makes no check on user permission to call this
>>>   * API. So basically we don't know on what condition a system should return
>>>   * EPERM. It is implementation defined.
>>> ------------
>>>
>> Hi Garrett,
>>
>>  I think it's better to report UNRESOLVED, whatever the os is.
> 
>     It's not implementation defined according to 2008.1, and it's flat
> out a requirement failure (not UNRESOLVED):
> 
> The sched_getparam() function shall fail if:
> 
> [EPERM]
>     The requesting process does not have permission to obtain the
> scheduling parameters of the specified process.
> 
> `shall' -> `must' in POSIX terms.

Thanks very much for telling me this information.

But the spec does not point out the what condition a process does not
have permission to do it.

> 
>     The test is incorrect because it fails to setgid the group to the
> non-root user's group.

Ditto.

The POSIX spec does not point out non-root user(non-root group too) does not
have permission to obtain the scheduling parameters of the init process.

Maybe i miss something. If so, please tell me, thanks very much.

Thanks
 Bian

> Thanks,
> -Garrett
> 
> 

-- 
Regards
Bian Naimeng


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)!
Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free!
Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires 
February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list