[LTP] mqns tests are failing

[LTP] mqns tests are failing

[Munipradeep Beerakam]

Hi,

I noticed that mqns test cases are failing. I am using March 2010 LTP.
After changing mq_open syscall in mqns_01.c file, test is passing. Same
thing is happening w.r.t. other mqns test cases. Below is the change I
made.

Changed 
   mqd = syscall(__NR_mq_open, SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL,0777,
NULL);

to
   mqd = mq_open(SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0777, NULL);

Failure output I got is below:
# ./mqns_01
posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
unshare(2).

mq_open: Permission denied
posixmq_namespace_01    1  TFAIL  :  mq_open failed

After changing as above, I got the below output:
# ./mqns_01
posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
unshare(2).

posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Checking namespaces isolation from
parent to child

posixmq_namespace_01    1  TPASS  :  child process didn't find mqueue

So, my question is that what is the difference between the two, i.e.,
the previous one and the changed one. Both are calling the same mq_open
system call. But first one is failing whereas the second one is
succeeding.

So, do we need to modify all mqns test cases to the new form?

Thanks
Muni


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

Re: [LTP] mqns tests are failing

[Garrett Cooper]

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Munipradeep Beerakam
<mpradeep@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that mqns test cases are failing. I am using March 2010 LTP.
> After changing mq_open syscall in mqns_01.c file, test is passing. Same
> thing is happening w.r.t. other mqns test cases. Below is the change I
> made.
>
> Changed
>   mqd = syscall(__NR_mq_open, SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL,0777,
> NULL);
>
> to
>   mqd = mq_open(SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0777, NULL);
>
> Failure output I got is below:
> # ./mqns_01
> posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
> unshare(2).
>
> mq_open: Permission denied
> posixmq_namespace_01    1  TFAIL  :  mq_open failed
>
> After changing as above, I got the below output:
> # ./mqns_01
> posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
> unshare(2).
>
> posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Checking namespaces isolation from
> parent to child
>
> posixmq_namespace_01    1  TPASS  :  child process didn't find mqueue
>
> So, my question is that what is the difference between the two, i.e.,
> the previous one and the changed one. Both are calling the same mq_open
> system call. But first one is failing whereas the second one is
> succeeding.
>
> So, do we need to modify all mqns test cases to the new form?

    Track down the execution path by first starting with glibc. It
might be a library vs kernel mismatch or a bug. Make sure that the
syscall number matches per your architecture, determine whether or not
your architecture has issues executing code in a biarch manner (64-bit
on 32-bit) if it applies.
HTH,
-Garrett

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

Re: [LTP] mqns tests are failing

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Garrett Cooper (yanegomi@gmail.com):
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Munipradeep Beerakam
> <mpradeep@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I noticed that mqns test cases are failing. I am using March 2010 LTP.
> > After changing mq_open syscall in mqns_01.c file, test is passing. Same
> > thing is happening w.r.t. other mqns test cases. Below is the change I
> > made.
> >
> > Changed
> >   mqd = syscall(__NR_mq_open, SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL,0777,
> > NULL);
> >
> > to
> >   mqd = mq_open(SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0777, NULL);
> >
> > Failure output I got is below:
> > # ./mqns_01
> > posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
> > unshare(2).
> >
> > mq_open: Permission denied
> > posixmq_namespace_01    1  TFAIL  :  mq_open failed
> >
> > After changing as above, I got the below output:
> > # ./mqns_01
> > posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
> > unshare(2).
> >
> > posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Checking namespaces isolation from
> > parent to child
> >
> > posixmq_namespace_01    1  TPASS  :  child process didn't find mqueue
> >
> > So, my question is that what is the difference between the two, i.e.,
> > the previous one and the changed one. Both are calling the same mq_open

See http://www.mail-archive.com/ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net/msg09073.html
for the ansswer.

> > system call. But first one is failing whereas the second one is
> > succeeding.
> >
> > So, do we need to modify all mqns test cases to the new form?
> 
>     Track down the execution path by first starting with glibc. It
> might be a library vs kernel mismatch or a bug. Make sure that the
> syscall number matches per your architecture, determine whether or not
> your architecture has issues executing code in a biarch manner (64-bit
> on 32-bit) if it applies.
> HTH,

-serge

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

Re: [LTP] mqns tests are failing

[Garrett Cooper]

On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Quoting Garrett Cooper (yanegomi@gmail.com):
>> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Munipradeep Beerakam
>> <mpradeep@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I noticed that mqns test cases are failing. I am using March 2010 LTP.
>> > After changing mq_open syscall in mqns_01.c file, test is passing. Same
>> > thing is happening w.r.t. other mqns test cases. Below is the change I
>> > made.
>> >
>> > Changed
>> >   mqd = syscall(__NR_mq_open, SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL,0777,
>> > NULL);
>> >
>> > to
>> >   mqd = mq_open(SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0777, NULL);
>> >
>> > Failure output I got is below:
>> > # ./mqns_01
>> > posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
>> > unshare(2).
>> >
>> > mq_open: Permission denied
>> > posixmq_namespace_01    1  TFAIL  :  mq_open failed
>> >
>> > After changing as above, I got the below output:
>> > # ./mqns_01
>> > posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
>> > unshare(2).
>> >
>> > posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Checking namespaces isolation from
>> > parent to child
>> >
>> > posixmq_namespace_01    1  TPASS  :  child process didn't find mqueue
>> >
>> > So, my question is that what is the difference between the two, i.e.,
>> > the previous one and the changed one. Both are calling the same mq_open
>
> See http://www.mail-archive.com/ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net/msg09073.html
> for the ansswer.
>
>> > system call. But first one is failing whereas the second one is
>> > succeeding.
>> >
>> > So, do we need to modify all mqns test cases to the new form?
>>
>>     Track down the execution path by first starting with glibc. It
>> might be a library vs kernel mismatch or a bug. Make sure that the
>> syscall number matches per your architecture, determine whether or not
>> your architecture has issues executing code in a biarch manner (64-bit
>> on 32-bit) if it applies.
>> HTH,

Ah, forgot about that...
-Garrett

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

Re: [LTP] mqns tests are failing

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Garrett Cooper (yanegomi@gmail.com):
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Quoting Garrett Cooper (yanegomi@gmail.com):
> >> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Munipradeep Beerakam
> >> <mpradeep@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I noticed that mqns test cases are failing. I am using March 2010 LTP.
> >> > After changing mq_open syscall in mqns_01.c file, test is passing. Same
> >> > thing is happening w.r.t. other mqns test cases. Below is the change I
> >> > made.
> >> >
> >> > Changed
> >> >   mqd = syscall(__NR_mq_open, SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL,0777,
> >> > NULL);
> >> >
> >> > to
> >> >   mqd = mq_open(SLASH_MQ1, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0777, NULL);
> >> >
> >> > Failure output I got is below:
> >> > # ./mqns_01
> >> > posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
> >> > unshare(2).
> >> >
> >> > mq_open: Permission denied
> >> > posixmq_namespace_01    1  TFAIL  :  mq_open failed
> >> >
> >> > After changing as above, I got the below output:
> >> > # ./mqns_01
> >> > posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Testing posix mq namespaces through
> >> > unshare(2).
> >> >
> >> > posixmq_namespace_01    0  TINFO  :  Checking namespaces isolation from
> >> > parent to child
> >> >
> >> > posixmq_namespace_01    1  TPASS  :  child process didn't find mqueue
> >> >
> >> > So, my question is that what is the difference between the two, i.e.,
> >> > the previous one and the changed one. Both are calling the same mq_open
> >
> > See http://www.mail-archive.com/ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net/msg09073.html
> > for the ansswer.
> >
> >> > system call. But first one is failing whereas the second one is
> >> > succeeding.
> >> >
> >> > So, do we need to modify all mqns test cases to the new form?
> >>
> >>     Track down the execution path by first starting with glibc. It
> >> might be a library vs kernel mismatch or a bug. Make sure that the
> >> syscall number matches per your architecture, determine whether or not
> >> your architecture has issues executing code in a biarch manner (64-bit
> >> on 32-bit) if it applies.
> >> HTH,
> 
> Ah, forgot about that...

So had I :)  And I think I'd assumed someone else would push the
patch you suggested.  I'll go ahead and send one later today.

-serge

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