public inbox for ltp@lists.linux.it
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: lufei <lufei@uniontech.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] unshare03: using soft limit of NOFILE
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 11:33:36 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250327103336.GA70364@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250314044257.1673303-1-lufei@uniontech.com>

Hi lufei, Al,

@Al, you're the author of the original test unshare_test.c [1] in kselftest.
This is a patch to LTP test unshare03.c, which is based on your test.

> I think it's safer to set NOFILE increasing from soft limit than from
> hard limit.

> Hard limit may lead to dup2 ENOMEM error which bring the result to
> TBROK on little memory machine. (e.g. 2GB memory in my situation, hard
> limit in /proc/sys/fs/nr_open come out to be 1073741816)

IMHO lowering number to ~ half (in my case) by using rlimit.rlim_max instead of
/proc/sys/fs/nr_open should not affect the functionality of the test, right?
Or am I missing something obvious?

@lufei I guess kselftest tools/testing/selftests/core/unshare_test.c would fail
for you as well, right?

Kind regards,
Petr

[1] https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=611fbeb44a777e5ab54ab3127ec85f72147911d8

> Signed-off-by: lufei <lufei@uniontech.com>
> ---
>  testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c | 14 ++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c
> index 7c5e71c4e..bb568264c 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/unshare/unshare03.c
> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@

>  static void run(void)
>  {
> -	int nr_open;
> +	int rlim_max;
>  	int nr_limit;
>  	struct rlimit rlimit;
>  	struct tst_clone_args args = {
> @@ -32,14 +32,12 @@ static void run(void)
>  		.exit_signal = SIGCHLD,
>  	};

> -	SAFE_FILE_SCANF(FS_NR_OPEN, "%d", &nr_open);
> -	tst_res(TDEBUG, "Maximum number of file descriptors: %d", nr_open);
> +	SAFE_GETRLIMIT(RLIMIT_NOFILE, &rlimit);
> +	rlim_max = rlimit.rlim_max;

> -	nr_limit = nr_open + NR_OPEN_LIMIT;
> +	nr_limit = rlim_max + NR_OPEN_LIMIT;
>  	SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(FS_NR_OPEN, "%d", nr_limit);

> -	SAFE_GETRLIMIT(RLIMIT_NOFILE, &rlimit);
> -
>  	rlimit.rlim_cur = nr_limit;
>  	rlimit.rlim_max = nr_limit;

> @@ -47,10 +45,10 @@ static void run(void)
>  	tst_res(TDEBUG, "Set new maximum number of file descriptors to : %d",
>  		nr_limit);

> -	SAFE_DUP2(2, nr_open + NR_OPEN_DUP);
> +	SAFE_DUP2(2, rlim_max + NR_OPEN_DUP);

>  	if (!SAFE_CLONE(&args)) {
> -		SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(FS_NR_OPEN, "%d", nr_open);
> +		SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(FS_NR_OPEN, "%d", rlim_max);
>  		TST_EXP_FAIL(unshare(CLONE_FILES), EMFILE);
>  		exit(0);
>  	}

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

  reply	other threads:[~2025-03-27 10:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-14  4:42 [LTP] [PATCH] unshare03: using soft limit of NOFILE lufei
2025-03-27 10:33 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
     [not found]   ` <0A99FFBB46DDB0B4+Z+YKSlAwn1vx3Dz4@rocky>
2025-03-28  8:50     ` Petr Vorel
2025-04-01 10:11 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-04-01 12:54   ` Petr Vorel
2025-04-01 13:55     ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-04-09  6:41   ` Lu Fei
2025-04-09  7:49 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2] unshare03: set nr_open with sizeof(long)*8 lufei
2025-04-10 15:35   ` Jan Stancek via ltp
2025-04-11  3:09   ` Li Wang via ltp
2025-04-11  3:21     ` Li Wang via ltp
2025-04-11  6:01       ` Lu Fei
2025-04-11  9:03         ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-04-11  9:30   ` [LTP] [PATCH v3] " lufei
2025-04-16  1:55     ` Li Wang via ltp

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=20250327103336.GA70364@pevik \
    --to=pvorel@suse.cz \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    --cc=lufei@uniontech.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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