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 5B221D3B7F6 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2024 09:28:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC963DA9AE for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2024 10:28:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (in-2.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.2]) (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 767193D71AD for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2024 10:28:21 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-2.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-2.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 265F4630CB5 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2024 10:28:17 +0100 (CET) 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 8AEDC1F381; Mon, 25 Nov 2024 09:28:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1732526895; 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=rHaT0R69sqfuSMpGDhaY6fHVuEK0777LYZEzqXnloPc=; b=ppeChh8VDgGk3kutDJGLNckw/vKXtC56zogteHzVP/Pi86HAXzeDL1UqhibyNSEfzW08gG ZgPF4TMJI4f1mvmdr01bdTCDo67KSu30Y6hHYFEiwY/JSdMHJ4r2daDP0O3I+nE4p2ez2f jTlaHG/Gbny23/eKutLjO3N1gmSgT0I= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1732526895; 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=rHaT0R69sqfuSMpGDhaY6fHVuEK0777LYZEzqXnloPc=; b=+OvNJ+1VvFEgydj1oB4xx35s3Em+WQY2Wplwr5DqRx8rKBz+uMq6wcTsV1OMFpoTa5bvi0 FRjq5bLrRbeTSJCg== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1732526895; 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=rHaT0R69sqfuSMpGDhaY6fHVuEK0777LYZEzqXnloPc=; b=ppeChh8VDgGk3kutDJGLNckw/vKXtC56zogteHzVP/Pi86HAXzeDL1UqhibyNSEfzW08gG ZgPF4TMJI4f1mvmdr01bdTCDo67KSu30Y6hHYFEiwY/JSdMHJ4r2daDP0O3I+nE4p2ez2f jTlaHG/Gbny23/eKutLjO3N1gmSgT0I= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1732526895; 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=rHaT0R69sqfuSMpGDhaY6fHVuEK0777LYZEzqXnloPc=; b=+OvNJ+1VvFEgydj1oB4xx35s3Em+WQY2Wplwr5DqRx8rKBz+uMq6wcTsV1OMFpoTa5bvi0 FRjq5bLrRbeTSJCg== 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 6F71513890; Mon, 25 Nov 2024 09:28:15 +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 3LEIGi9DRGf8YQAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Mon, 25 Nov 2024 09:28:15 +0000 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 10:28:14 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Jan Stancek Message-ID: <20241125092814.GA298526@pevik> References: <20241114144029.349559-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20241114144029.349559-4-pvorel@suse.cz> <20241115140005.GD1718754@pevik> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.50 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[99.99%]; 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]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[] X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-2.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 3/5] mq_timedsend01: Workaround segfault on libc variant on 32 bit 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 Jan, ... > > > > + if (tc->bad_ts_addr) { > > > Would it make sense to run bad_msg_addr/EFAULT test also in child? > > First, thanks a lot a review. > > I'm not sure myself. So far it's not needed (problem is only with struct > > timespec *abs_timeout not with const char msg_ptr[]). But OTOH it does not > > harm. Doing this might prevent some failure in the future. > It was only as a precaution. Either way, feel free to add to series: > Acked-by: Jan Stancek Thanks a lot for your review. Merged with changing bad_msg_addr/EFAULT being tested also in child. Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp