From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v2] syscalls/setfsgid02: Rewrite setfsgid02
Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 10:23:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YJo+5e59dSQm2vjP@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210508064351.10737-1-zhaogongyi@huawei.com>
Hi Zhao,
Thank you for rewriting the test.
> 1)update to new API
> 2)rewrite setfsgid02 according man 2
I'd actually specify, what exactly you changed.
Cyril asked for:
- unprivileged process cannot change the value i.e. value that is
different from return from ret=setfsgid(-1) is passed as
setfsgid(ret+1) followed by setfsgid(-1) and all of these returns the
same value and the value also matches process effective group ID
- privileged process can change the value i.e. the same as
unprivileged but we expect the last setfsgid(-1) return
the new value. We either have to reset the setfsgid() at the end of
the test or run it in a fork()-ed process so that we start with a
clean plate for each iteration
Your code expects root has euid 0 and nobody does not have euid 1,
which of course works, but wouldn't be better to run setfsgid(-1) before testing
to verify it, as Cyril suggests?
...
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/setfsgid/setfsgid02.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/setfsgid/setfsgid02.c
> -/*
> - * Testcase to check the basic functionality of setfsgid(2) system
> - * call failures.
> +/*\
> + * [Description]
> + * Testcase to check the basic functionality of setfsgid(2) system
> + * call failures with priviledged or unpriviledged user.
typo: (un)priviledged => (un)privileged
And here be more verbose as well (IMHO "basic functionality" does not say much),
e.g. something like (in case you update the code):
* Testcase for setfsgid() syscall to check that
* - privileged user can change a filesystem group ID different from saved
* value of previous setfsgid() call
* - unprivileged user cannot change it
> */
> -#include <stdio.h>
> -#include <unistd.h>
> -#include <grp.h>
> #include <pwd.h>
> -#include <sys/types.h>
> -#include <errno.h>
> -
> -#include "test.h"
> -#include "compat_16.h"
> +#include "tst_test.h"
> +#include "compat_tst_16.h"
> -TCID_DEFINE(setfsgid02);
> -int TST_TOTAL = 1;
> +static gid_t gid;
> +static gid_t pre_gid;
> +static const char nobody_uid[] = "nobody";
> +static struct passwd *ltpuser;
> -static void setup(void);
> -static void cleanup(void);
> -
> -int main(int ac, char **av)
> +static void run(unsigned int i)
> {
> - int lc;
> -
> - gid_t gid;
> -
> - tst_parse_opts(ac, av, NULL, NULL);
> -
> - setup();
> -
> - for (lc = 0; TEST_LOOPING(lc); lc++) {
> - tst_count = 0;
> -
> - gid = 1;
> - while (getgrgid(gid))
> - gid++;
> + int cnt;
> - GID16_CHECK(gid, setfsgid, cleanup);
> + GID16_CHECK(gid, setfsgid);
> - TEST(SETFSGID(cleanup, gid));
> -
> - if (TEST_RETURN == -1) {
> - tst_resm(TFAIL | TTERRNO,
> - "setfsgid() failed unexpectedly");
> - continue;
> - }
> + if (i == 0) {
> + ltpuser = SAFE_GETPWNAM(nobody_uid);
> + SAFE_SETEUID(ltpuser->pw_uid);
> + }
> - if (TEST_RETURN == gid) {
> - tst_resm(TFAIL, "setfsgid() returned %ld, expected %d",
> - TEST_RETURN, gid);
> - } else {
> - tst_resm(TPASS, "setfsgid() returned expected value : "
> - "%ld", TEST_RETURN);
> + /*
> + * Run SETFSGID() twice to check the second running have changed
> + * the gid for priviledged user, and have not changed the gid
> + * for unpriviledged user.
And here typos.
> + */
> + for (cnt = 0; cnt < 2; cnt++) {
> + TEST(SETFSGID(gid));
> + if (TST_RET != pre_gid)
Cast to long is needed to prevent introducing warnings for 32bit compilation:
if ((long)pre_gid != TST_RET).
And move pre_gid to be first (WARNING: Comparisons should place the constant on
the right side of the test).
> + tst_res(TFAIL, "setfsgid() returned %ld", TST_RET);
> + else {
> + tst_res(TPASS,
> + "setfsgid() returned expected value : %ld",
> + TST_RET);
> + if (i == 1) {
> + pre_gid = gid;
> + gid++;
> + }
> }
> }
> + if (i == 0) {
> + SAFE_SETEUID(0);
> + }
nit: no brackets needed here.
scripts/checkpatch.pl from kernel is your friend
> }
IMHO improvements are good enough for test to be merged before release.
Kind regards,
Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-11 8:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-08 6:43 [LTP] [PATCH v2] syscalls/setfsgid02: Rewrite setfsgid02 Zhao Gongyi
2021-05-11 8:23 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2021-09-01 7:57 ` Petr Vorel
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=YJo+5e59dSQm2vjP@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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