From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cyril Hrubis Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 14:08:20 +0200 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v1 4/4] syscalls/shmget06: Add test when the id of shm_next_id has existed In-Reply-To: <1620809541-6891-4-git-send-email-xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com> References: <1620809541-6891-1-git-send-email-xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com> <1620809541-6891-4-git-send-email-xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.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 Hi! > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/shmget/shmget06.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/shmget/shmget06.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000..3138d4482 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ipc/shmget/shmget06.c > @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later > +/* > + * Copyright (c) 2021 FUJITSU LIMITED. All rights reserved. > + * Author: Yang Xu > + */ > + > +/*\ > + * [Description] > + * > + * It is a basic test about shm_next_id. ^ for > + * > + * When the shared memory segment identifier that shm_next_id stored has > + * existed, call shmget with different key just use another unused value in range ^ ^ 'does exist' instead of 'has existed' | or even better 'is allready in use' | will > + * [0,INT_MAX]. kernel doesn't guarantee the desired id. ^ Capital letter at the start of the sentence. > + */ > + > +#include > +#include > +#include > +#include > +#include > +#include "tst_test.h" > +#include "tst_safe_sysv_ipc.h" > +#include "libnewipc.h" > + > +#define NEXT_ID_PATH "/proc/sys/kernel/shm_next_id" > + > +static int shm_id[2], pid; > +static key_t shmkey[2]; > + > +static void verify_shmget(void) > +{ > + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(NEXT_ID_PATH, "%d", shm_id[0]); > + > + shm_id[1] = SAFE_SHMGET(shmkey[1], SHM_SIZE, IPC_CREAT | SHM_RW); > + if (shm_id[1] == shm_id[0]) > + tst_res(TFAIL, "shm id %d has existed, shmget() returns the" > + " same shm id unexpectedly", shm_id[0]); > + else > + tst_res(TPASS, "shm id %d has existed, shmget() returns the" > + " new shm id %d", shm_id[0], shm_id[1]); > + > + SAFE_SHMCTL(shm_id[1], IPC_RMID, NULL); > +} > + > +static void setup(void) > +{ > + shmkey[0] = GETIPCKEY(); > + shmkey[1] = GETIPCKEY(); > + pid = getpid(); > + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(NEXT_ID_PATH, "%d", pid); So we are using this to "randomize" the id here right? > + shm_id[0] = SAFE_SHMGET(shmkey[0], SHM_SIZE, IPC_CREAT | SHM_RW); > + tst_res(TINFO, "Test shm_next_id effects on shmget(different key) " > + "when this identifier of shared memory segment has existed"); I do not think that printing test description is useful, especially since we have nicely formatted test description in the test source which gets exported into the metadata. > +} > + > +static void cleanup(void) > +{ > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) { > + if (shm_id[i] != -1) > + SAFE_SHMCTL(shm_id[i], IPC_RMID, NULL); > + } > +} > + > +static struct tst_test test = { > + .needs_tmpdir = 1, > + .setup = setup, > + .cleanup = cleanup, > + .test_all = verify_shmget, > + .needs_kconfigs = (const char *[]) { > + "CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE=y", > + NULL > + }, > + .needs_root = 1, > +}; With the minor adjustements in description: Reivewed-by: Cyril Hrubis -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz