From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com (mail-wr1-f68.google.com [209.85.221.68]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.4990.1603138684650766101 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:18:05 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=vV4YxSaS; spf=pass (domain: gmail.com, ip: 209.85.221.68, mailfrom: petr.vorel@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id n18so1158433wrs.5 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:18:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=B4Glb9xDdLu5iWc2KsKtOEeByRwywRslCn4Cmf1IlBc=; b=vV4YxSaSXc2hYcXWTEFXQXo64kL4pNyV7RQUEM8HvWzUym0nnB5LMQJGOrfn0A0nnY WIbL4AAF2c1xMOsj3fE9UbnlHEPydXOA9IAy0VGSbEFxt9Lg0hk0U9tLnscus2FPzb00 5XZG6Y+ahq1rhlXxheE3Vd0GcBBTVP3bWGn0JbsLCBwaNHIPRLLtb5on4v7L4Nqx0kWC GG1v9Jb+iv5/WTi94s9B7aFcSzEBhRgpkG/ZCwNoDg+zv8pSvRG5Oz5y+VWIDKMpuGTn zalT8JR/fNzqAe/Q3tf9CsHW2goXxVM/kRRk0xN/o+791a1o/uNvfFkqXj8aCm6KOnD6 2WWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=B4Glb9xDdLu5iWc2KsKtOEeByRwywRslCn4Cmf1IlBc=; b=TLOAUCKGm69cQtVILVaMHEIEjY+VC8oj3c9fEVH2GJ+QD3cRxSqPiGhnOjRXzPPOWB 7BU8yYtoECz7YCBCgp78S2CdZiSXuWQVGsk39hUG2m1zy0cvqvf+r+9/KI2fmEIaFhu3 2omE5HaF2hzUEA28h2fxfzeuOdKULdZlu2PsCQQj7tAXioyIjmLQkPe995YghiyK8vbO MyU2m1QzqlY5+CEoerHvmv5jZe5V6OJEOH+0tJC9Ahmolr9jaBslnlCGFyLsXlwVFbgI 1KLMmga5r41ny19arFphPfMy6txeENyTJgEQXtNzdJFanGl9pzgLFmBTKX/Pn+orfRLa PKIw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531VSj2jzjxuEupUQLMRW4YOLxn1jsH0gE3sQV7iIo01vbQ1xiQO 80AdvXZzVdOY16JIblORFIE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzWsX03jhU5LzIoDQ9d0hIVqAGiQ5sNlpM593xRhoerFThDhoKA6NUkj6SX3inVx7rtZY43jw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e741:: with SMTP id c1mr1120882wrn.16.1603138683079; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from dell5510 ([62.201.25.198]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y10sm1017998wrq.73.2020.10.19.13.18.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:18:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 22:18:00 +0200 From: "Petr Vorel" To: Khem Raj Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it, openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2] sigwaitinfo: Do not run invalid/undefined test cases Message-ID: <20201019201800.GA12642@dell5510> Reply-To: Petr Vorel References: <20200529014448.3815022-1-raj.khem@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200529014448.3815022-1-raj.khem@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Hi Khem, > These testcases run for eternity on musl > test_bad_address* cases are passing invalid pointers to a function; that's always UB > empty_set and timeout rely on the implementation-defined "may fail" for EINTR in sigtimedwait [1] > normally "may fail" is an "unspecified" but here the impl > is supposed to document it so it's "impl-defined" > [1] https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/sigtimedwait.html Sorry for the delay. Could you please verify, if test still fails in the current master? If yes, would you please update the patch? Now, I dropped it from the latest update: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/topic/patch_1_1_ltp_update_to/77667273?p=,,,20,0,0,0::recentpostdate%2Fsticky,,,20,2,0,77667273 Kind regards, Petr > Signed-off-by: Khem Raj > Cc: Rich Felker > --- > v2: Extend same fixes to include sigwaitinfo01 > .../kernel/syscalls/sigwaitinfo/sigwaitinfo01.c | 12 ++---------- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/sigwaitinfo/sigwaitinfo01.c > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/sigwaitinfo/sigwaitinfo01.c > @@ -422,15 +422,10 @@ struct test_desc { > } tests[] = { > #ifdef TEST_RT_SIGTIMEDWAIT > { > - test_empty_set, my_rt_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > test_unmasked_matching, my_rt_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > test_masked_matching, my_rt_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > test_unmasked_matching_noinfo, my_rt_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_masked_matching_noinfo, my_rt_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_bad_address, my_rt_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_bad_address2, my_rt_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_bad_address3, my_rt_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_timeout, my_rt_sigtimedwait, 0}, > + test_masked_matching_noinfo, my_rt_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, > /* Special cases */ > /* 1: sigwaitinfo does respond to ignored signal */ > { > @@ -452,25 +447,17 @@ struct test_desc { > #endif > #if defined TEST_SIGWAITINFO > { > - test_empty_set, my_sigwaitinfo, SIGUSR1}, { > test_unmasked_matching, my_sigwaitinfo, SIGUSR1}, { > test_masked_matching, my_sigwaitinfo, SIGUSR1}, { > test_unmasked_matching_noinfo, my_sigwaitinfo, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_masked_matching_noinfo, my_sigwaitinfo, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_bad_address, my_sigwaitinfo, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_bad_address2, my_sigwaitinfo, SIGUSR1}, > + test_masked_matching_noinfo, my_sigwaitinfo, SIGUSR1}, > #endif > #if defined TEST_SIGTIMEDWAIT > { > - test_empty_set, my_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > test_unmasked_matching, my_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > test_masked_matching, my_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > test_unmasked_matching_noinfo, my_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_masked_matching_noinfo, my_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_bad_address, my_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_bad_address2, my_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_bad_address3, my_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, { > - test_timeout, my_sigtimedwait, 0}, > + test_masked_matching_noinfo, my_sigtimedwait, SIGUSR1}, > #endif > };