Re: [LTP] [PATCH] rt_sigqueueinfo: Add negative tests for rt_sigqueueinfo

[Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>]

Hi!
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2024 FUJITSU LIMITED. All Rights Reserved.
> + * Author: Ma Xinjian <maxj.fnst@fujitsu.com>
> + */
> +
> +/*\
> + * [Description]
> + *
> + * Verify that rt_sigqueueinfo(2) fails with
> + *
> + * - EINVAL when sig is invalid
> + * - EPERM when uinfo->si_code is invalid
> + * - ESRCH when no thread group matching tgid is found
> + */
> +#include <pwd.h>
> +#include <signal.h>
> +#include "config.h"
> +#include "tst_test.h"
> +
> +#ifdef HAVE_STRUCT_SIGACTION_SA_SIGACTION
> +#include "rt_sigqueueinfo.h"
> +
> +static siginfo_t siginfo_einval;
> +static siginfo_t siginfo_eperm;
> +static siginfo_t siginfo_esrch;

Ideally these should be allocated as guarded buffers:

https://linux-test-project.readthedocs.io/en/latest/developers/api_c_tests.html#guarded-buffers

You can have a look at signalfd02.c and the .bufs in the tst_test
structure initialization.

> +static pid_t tgid_notfound = -1;
> +
> +static struct test_case_t {
> +	pid_t *tgid;
> +	int sig;
> +	siginfo_t *uinfo;
> +	int expected_errno;
> +	char *desc;
> +} tcases[] = {
> +	{NULL, -1, &siginfo_einval, EINVAL, "sig is invalid"},
> +	{NULL, SIGUSR1, &siginfo_eperm, EPERM, "uinfo->si_code is invalid"},
> +	{&tgid_notfound, SIGUSR1, &siginfo_esrch, ESRCH,
> +		"no thread group matching tgid is found"},
> +};
> +
> +static void setup(void)
> +{
> +	siginfo_einval.si_code = SI_QUEUE;
> +	siginfo_eperm.si_code = 0;
> +	siginfo_esrch.si_code = SI_QUEUE;
> +}
> +
> +static void sig_handler(int sig)
> +{
> +	tst_res(TINFO, "Receive signal %s(%d)", tst_strsig(sig), sig);
> +}
> +
> +static void parent_do(struct test_case_t *tc, pid_t pid)
> +{
> +	pid_t real_pid;
> +
> +	if (tc->tgid)
> +		real_pid = *(tc->tgid);
> +	else
> +		real_pid = pid;
> +
> +	TST_EXP_FAIL(sys_rt_sigqueueinfo(real_pid, tc->sig, tc->uinfo),
> +		tc->expected_errno, "%s", tc->desc);
> +	TST_CHECKPOINT_WAKE(1);
> +}
> +
> +static void child_do(struct test_case_t *tc)
> +{
> +	struct sigaction sa;
> +
> +	sa.sa_handler = sig_handler;
> +	SAFE_SIGEMPTYSET(&sa.sa_mask);
> +	if (tc->sig > 0)
> +		SAFE_SIGACTION(tc->sig, &sa, NULL);
> +	else
> +		SAFE_SIGACTION(SIGUSR1, &sa, NULL);
> +
> +	TST_CHECKPOINT_WAKE(0);
> +	TST_CHECKPOINT_WAIT(1);

The child will never get any signal so all that needs to be done here is
to do TST_CHECKPOINT_WAIT() so that the child exists while the parent
runs.

> +}
> +
> +static void verify_rt_sigqueueinfo(unsigned int i)
> +{
> +	struct test_case_t *tc = &tcases[i];
> +	pid_t pid = SAFE_FORK();
> +
> +	if (!pid) {
> +		child_do(tc);
> +		exit(0);
> +	}
> +	TST_CHECKPOINT_WAIT(0);
> +	parent_do(tc, pid);
> +	SAFE_WAITPID(pid, NULL, 0);
> +}
> +
> +static struct tst_test test = {
> +	.setup = setup,
> +	.tcnt = ARRAY_SIZE(tcases),
> +	.test = verify_rt_sigqueueinfo,
> +	.forks_child = 1,
> +	.needs_checkpoints = 1,
> +};
> +
> +#else
> +	TST_TEST_TCONF("This system does not support rt_sigqueueinfo()");
> +#endif /* HAVE_STRUCT_SIGACTION_SA_SIGACTION */
> -- 
> 2.39.3
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

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