From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yang Xu Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 14:41:51 +0800 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/kill11: add a check between hard limit and MIN_RLIMIT_CORE In-Reply-To: <5E439705.4010303@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <1581486286-13615-1-git-send-email-xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com> <5E439705.4010303@cn.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: <05dd082a-417b-b71b-909a-2691b96adec9@cn.fujitsu.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it on 2020/02/12 14:11, Xiao Yang wrote: > On 2020/2/12 13:44, Yang Xu wrote: >> Currently, running this case will report EINVAL error if I run "ulimit -c >> 1023" command firstly. From setrlimit(2)manpage, it got EINVAL error >> because >> rlim->rlim_cur was greater than rlim->rlim_max. So add a check for it >> before >> setrlimit. > Hi Xu, > > It seems better to fix the issue by setting both rlim_cur and rlimit_max > to the MIN_RLIMIT_CORE. > We can not raise rlim_max value under unprivileged user. Or, should I cleanup this case and use needs_root=1 ? Best Regards Yang Xu > Thanks, > Xiao Yang >> Reported-by: Pankaj Vinadrao Joshi >> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu >> --- >> ? testcases/kernel/syscalls/kill/kill11.c | 3 +++ >> ? 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/kill/kill11.c >> b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/kill/kill11.c >> index 83fba5beb..5f70b0a07 100644 >> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/kill/kill11.c >> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/kill/kill11.c >> @@ -201,6 +201,9 @@ void setup(void) >> >> ????? SAFE_GETRLIMIT(NULL, RLIMIT_CORE,&rlim); >> >> +??? if (rlim.rlim_max> +??????? tst_brkm(TCONF, NULL, "hard limit(%lu)less than >> MIN_RLIMT_CORE(%i)", >> +??????????????? rlim.rlim_max, MIN_RLIMIT_CORE); >> ????? if (rlim.rlim_cur> ????????? tst_resm(TINFO, "Adjusting RLIMIT_CORE to %i", >> MIN_RLIMIT_CORE); >> ????????? rlim.rlim_cur = MIN_RLIMIT_CORE; >