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 44BB8C43217 for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 09:05:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01B083CADA4 for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 10:05:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (in-7.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5A5D3CA86B for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 10:05:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1c]) (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 C698A200977 for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 10:04:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 853F4336F9; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 09:04:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1667379899; h=from:from: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=qVqJ1r8hmTS1Wt+KZs4Gb49D4tiAoz46OvG8vu+Si0s=; b=D67Feb98vIwtec3g4IJy7/Y4S+cEfnOsPBw4CWhv+33R5tdxqbZlsbEt6TIE3QwpbTidag x8KRkYt4yYmnGVGs1bRUFndAlEcC5B1PfaF8vVUfui8h2kEI/vS3y0Im66kBR3q36RMtKM Mvdz0y9kh+WdVcJISLkLfqGcWFhAf4o= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1667379899; h=from:from: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=qVqJ1r8hmTS1Wt+KZs4Gb49D4tiAoz46OvG8vu+Si0s=; b=8dQhICMseX+0SkpqypRGybuqi4+1mkoC6nSYMEBC1VpNEC+xm/WPahk2M+ALKlDiXCJTTg XbjvX9YrYHt2qrDQ== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3B95139D3; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 09:04:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id jGh5O7oyYmMZIQAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Wed, 02 Nov 2022 09:04:58 +0000 Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 10:06:32 +0100 From: Cyril Hrubis To: zhaogongyi Message-ID: References: <0aaeb7d55c194ca79b2958dc8c4e5204@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0aaeb7d55c194ca79b2958dc8c4e5204@huawei.com> X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-7.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/fork02: new test for fork() 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: , Cc: LTP List 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! > > > Man-pages does not menthion this, and the other field inherited does > > not mentioned too. > > > > I guess that this is described in POSIX in: > > > > "The new process (child process) shall be an exact copy of the calling > > process (parent process) except as detailed below:" > > > > at https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/ > > > > And there is nothing about working dir in the list of special cases hence > > working dir is exactly the same as for parent since it has to be exact copy > > of parent. > > > > It seems reasonable to not test the result of full inheritance from the parent process, otherwise there are a lot of testcases. Certainly the interesting part would be testing all the exceptions, but having one test that checks a few things that are supposed to be the same wouldn't harm either. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp