From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Li Wang Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 16:43:20 +0800 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/acct02: Check read size. In-Reply-To: <116299070.9793183.1572457283737.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <20190925094721.18932-1-chrubis@suse.cz> <20190925135634.GA32581@dell5510> <575273995.9684474.1572426415443.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <1665612504.9724602.1572440600772.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <20191030144649.GA25642@dell5510> <116299070.9793183.1572457283737.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 1:41 AM Jan Stancek wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > Hi Jan, > > > > > > I'm seeing similar failure: > > > > > > tst_kconfig.c:62: INFO: Parsing kernel config > > > > '/boot/config-3.10.0-1106.el7.cki.s390x' > > > > tst_test.c:1118: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s > > > > tst_kconfig.c:62: INFO: Parsing kernel config > > > > '/boot/config-3.10.0-1106.el7.cki.s390x' > > > > acct02.c:239: INFO: Verifying using 'struct acct_v3' > > > > acct02.c:192: INFO: == entry 1 == > > > > acct02.c:88: INFO: ac_btime < 1572367954 (1572367953) > > > > > ^^ This is 'acct02_helper', which seemingly started before > 'start_time'. > > > > > ac_btime is calculated back from current time and elapsed time at > > > fill_ac(): > > > > > ac->ac_btime = get_seconds() - elapsed; > > > > > s390s are slower, so my guess is another second ticks before btime gets > > > calculated, > > > and it appears to have started later. > > Agree. > > > > > > acct02.c:192: INFO: == entry 2 == > > > > acct02.c:82: INFO: ac_comm != 'acct02_helper' ('acct02') > > > > acct02.c:88: INFO: ac_btime < 1572367954 (1572367953) > > > > acct02.c:133: INFO: ac_exitcode != 32768 (0) > > > > acct02.c:141: INFO: ac_ppid != 25608 (25607) > > > > > The 2nd record is filled at acct(NULL), even though process still runs: > > > > > [ 1156.025654] CPU: 0 PID: 11772 Comm: acct02_helper Tainted: G > > > OE ------------ 3.10.0-1106.el7.s390x #1 > > > <> > > > [ 1156.027105] [<00000000001dd630>] fill_ac+0x0/0x440 > > > [ 1156.027108] ([<00000000001ddae8>] do_acct_process+0x78/0x1a0) > > > [ 1156.027110] [<00000000001de3ae>] acct_process+0xf6/0x140 > > > [ 1156.027112] [<000000000014de32>] do_exit+0x752/0xa38 > > > [ 1156.027116] [<000000000014e216>] do_group_exit+0x66/0xf8 > > > [ 1156.027118] [<000000000014e2ea>] SyS_exit_group+0x42/0x48 > > > > > [ 1157.033294] CPU: 1 PID: 11771 Comm: acct02 Tainted: G OE > > > ------------ 3.10.0-1106.el7.s390x #1 > > > <> > > > [ 1157.033384] [<00000000001dd630>] fill_ac+0x0/0x440 > > > [ 1157.033386] ([<00000000001ddae8>] do_acct_process+0x78/0x1a0) > > > [ 1157.033389] [<00000000001ddcda>] acct_pin_kill+0x52/0xa8 > > > [ 1157.033391] [<000000000034a83e>] pin_kill+0xb6/0x178 > > > [ 1157.033395] [<00000000001ddfe8>] SyS_acct+0x2b8/0x350 > > > > Hm, did you reproduce it on 4.18 (rhel8)? > > Above was RHEL7. Do you expect different outcome on RHEL8? > I was looking at upstream sources too and it looked similar. > > Anyway, I don't think this part is an issue, test will skip it > because "comm" doesn't match. > > We can tweak 'ac_btime' condition, but I think the test will remain > How much time of the ac_btime shaking to be tolerated is proper? > race-y in environments with higher steal time: > I'm sorry, what does it mean here? > > acct02.c:239: INFO: Verifying using 'struct acct_v3' > acct02.c:192: INFO: == entry 1 == > acct02.c:127: INFO: elap_time/clock_ticks >= 2 (236/100: 2.00) > acct02.c:192: INFO: == entry 2 == > acct02.c:82: INFO: ac_comm != 'acct02_helper' ('acct02') > acct02.c:127: INFO: elap_time/clock_ticks >= 2 (236/100: 2.00) > acct02.c:133: INFO: ac_exitcode != 32768 (0) > acct02.c:141: INFO: ac_ppid != 43213 (43212) > acct02.c:182: FAIL: end of file reached > > > -- > Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp > -- Regards, Li Wang -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: