Re: [LTP] LTP's filecaps test gives false positive results

From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Rishikesh K Rajak <risrajak@in.ibm.com>,
	Iranna D Ankad <iranna.ankad@in.ibm.com>,
	"ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net" <ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [LTP] LTP's filecaps test gives false positive results
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:13:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <364299f41003181213i7b5bffe3pc1c8ab43fc234ef3@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100318145505.GC6287@us.ibm.com>

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 7:55 AM, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Quoting Rishikesh K Rajak (risrajak@linux.vnet.ibm.com):
>> On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 01:14:12AM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> >     Yes -- and I think this is because the constants no longer have
>> > the same name:
>> >
>> > http://fxr.watson.org/fxr/source/include/linux/prctl.h?v=linux-2.6#L68
>> >
>> >     Note -- CAP_BSET_DROP should be: PR_CAPBSET_DROP, etc.
>> >
>> >     Which is why I stress _not_ putting these hardcoded constants in
>> > test files (POLLHDRDUP -- or whatever it was in ppoll01 -- is the only
>> > real violation I can remember OTOH that I need to clean up
>> > eventually). We need to be consistent with any and all documentation
>> > provided to end-developers or we [LTP] are going to shoot ourselves in
>> > the foot if and when the underlying functionality changes.
>> >     I'll update the tests this weekend, but I would like it if someone
>> > test the tests on an outdated distro (RHEL 4.x?) once I provide a
>>
>> Hi Garret,
>>
>> Can you please look this again ?
>
> Wait, what?  Was the original complaint just about a #warning?  Note
> that it will #warn but then go ahead and define it, so there should not
> be a real problem.
>
> Anyway I'll try to get time tomorrow to rewrite this to use the constants
> from the new securebits.h (which may not be in sys/ yet, but is in linux/
> atm and will show up under sys/ at some point).  If Garret could help me
> with doing an automate thingamagiggy to detect whether prctl(CAP_BSET_DROP)
> returns -ENOSYS and not compile/install/run the tests in that case, that'd
> be great.
>
> And maybe I'll finally implement some of the new securebits testcases I
> spelled out a year or two ago.

Hi Serge,
    AC_RUN_IFELSE is what you want :
http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf.html#Runtime --
make sure to write a cross-compile statement with a sensible default
(enabled?).
    I'll help you write up a test once you have something to compile :).
Thanks,
-Garrett

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list