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 14B6DC27C4F for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 11:09:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ED943D0EB1 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 13:09:48 +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 8C0673D0C8B for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 13:09:32 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: in-7.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2; helo=smtp-out2.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) 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 04B21208DEC for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 13:09:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [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 246011FB6C; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 11:09:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1718968170; h=from:from:reply-to: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=tqAq/qSFjMCrCQQ/1jjA4WS8JELKv/b052gRhoc3DvA=; b=pb9/OC47jhYvfUmtCKOKMQAnzfnbqqkJ3OW0y9gkLMJ6Bugk7nlcFIATWlTtw5uXYT/1UG ILsyYu798M41tOW7p7VzbtoTxVJ+3XzA+zQuX2Sm/DfFY2Uq9wqSl9HhNQTxmL4AE3MA1s HYet5++DPZ+Ue11xtgXBHZPXiVNEZzg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1718968170; h=from:from:reply-to: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=tqAq/qSFjMCrCQQ/1jjA4WS8JELKv/b052gRhoc3DvA=; b=s6lV/rlxkHDEUoBk5bDOpfNmwIihOugIgwQa4vDx3XcEPUsxq0NCRXsHOgp9H3vucHAqJB wrJ8k9RcxdnlMWDw== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1718968170; h=from:from:reply-to: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=tqAq/qSFjMCrCQQ/1jjA4WS8JELKv/b052gRhoc3DvA=; b=pb9/OC47jhYvfUmtCKOKMQAnzfnbqqkJ3OW0y9gkLMJ6Bugk7nlcFIATWlTtw5uXYT/1UG ILsyYu798M41tOW7p7VzbtoTxVJ+3XzA+zQuX2Sm/DfFY2Uq9wqSl9HhNQTxmL4AE3MA1s HYet5++DPZ+Ue11xtgXBHZPXiVNEZzg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1718968170; h=from:from:reply-to: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=tqAq/qSFjMCrCQQ/1jjA4WS8JELKv/b052gRhoc3DvA=; b=s6lV/rlxkHDEUoBk5bDOpfNmwIihOugIgwQa4vDx3XcEPUsxq0NCRXsHOgp9H3vucHAqJB wrJ8k9RcxdnlMWDw== 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 E0BE813AAA; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 11:09:29 +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 Lw0yMWlfdWYQYgAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Fri, 21 Jun 2024 11:09:29 +0000 Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 13:09:24 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu Message-ID: <20240621110924.GA672386@pevik> References: <1718700544-17304-1-git-send-email-nobuhiro1.iwamatsu@toshiba.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1718700544-17304-1-git-send-email-nobuhiro1.iwamatsu@toshiba.co.jp> X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.50 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[] X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-7.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] lib: tst_fd: Add kernel version check to memfd_secret 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: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel 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 Nobuhiro, > memfd_secret is a syscall added since 5.14. On earlier kernels, tests such > as accept03, readahead01 and splice07 that use memfd_secret fail. > This adds a kernel version check to the tst_fd library when running tests using > memfd_secret. Cyril's suggestion to add fallback definitions sounds to me as a good idea: https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/ZnVCcU6jOU98DYek@yuki/ I guess that the best fix is to add fallback definitions for memfd_secret into include/lapi/syscalls/*.in files. That way we should get -1 and EINVAL properly even when kernel does not support the syscall. Could you please try that first? Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp