From: Stas Sergeev <stsp2@yandex.ru>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Stas Sergeev <stsp2@yandex.ru>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] selftests: add OFD lock tests
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 14:55:07 +0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230620095507.2677463-4-stsp2@yandex.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230620095507.2677463-1-stsp2@yandex.ru>
Test the basic locking stuff on 2 fds: multiple read locks,
conflicts between read and write locks, use of len==0 for queries.
Also test for pid and F_UNLCK F_OFD_GETLK extensions.
Signed-off-by: Stas Sergeev <stsp2@yandex.ru>
CC: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
CC: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
CC: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
CC: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
CC: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
CC: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
CC: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
---
tools/testing/selftests/locking/Makefile | 2 +
tools/testing/selftests/locking/ofdlocks.c | 138 +++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 140 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/locking/ofdlocks.c
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/locking/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/locking/Makefile
index 6e7761ab3536..a83ced1626de 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/locking/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/locking/Makefile
@@ -7,4 +7,6 @@ all:
TEST_PROGS := ww_mutex.sh
+TEST_GEN_PROGS := ofdlocks
+
include ../lib.mk
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/locking/ofdlocks.c b/tools/testing/selftests/locking/ofdlocks.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..1cff350e2c81
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/locking/ofdlocks.c
@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+#define _GNU_SOURCE
+#include <fcntl.h>
+#include <assert.h>
+#include <stdio.h>
+#include <unistd.h>
+#include <string.h>
+#include "../kselftest.h"
+
+static int lock_set(int fd, struct flock *fl)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ fl->l_pid = 0; // needed for OFD locks
+ fl->l_whence = SEEK_SET;
+ ret = fcntl(fd, F_OFD_SETLK, fl);
+ if (ret)
+ perror("fcntl()");
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int lock_get(int fd, struct flock *fl)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ fl->l_pid = 0; // needed for OFD locks
+ fl->l_whence = SEEK_SET;
+ ret = fcntl(fd, F_OFD_GETLK, fl);
+ if (ret)
+ perror("fcntl()");
+ return ret;
+}
+
+int main(void)
+{
+ int rc;
+ struct flock fl, fl2;
+ int fd = open("/tmp/aa", O_RDWR | O_CREAT | O_EXCL, 0600);
+ int fd2 = open("/tmp/aa", O_RDONLY);
+
+ unlink("aa");
+ assert(fd != -1);
+ assert(fd2 != -1);
+ ksft_print_msg("[INFO] opened fds %i %i\n", fd, fd2);
+
+ /* Set some read lock */
+ fl.l_type = F_RDLCK;
+ fl.l_start = 5;
+ fl.l_len = 3;
+ rc = lock_set(fd, &fl);
+ if (rc == 0) {
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[SUCCESS] set OFD read lock on first fd\n");
+ } else {
+ ksft_print_msg("[FAIL] to set OFD read lock on first fd\n");
+ return -1;
+ }
+ /* Make sure read locks do not conflict on different fds. */
+ fl.l_type = F_RDLCK;
+ fl.l_start = 5;
+ fl.l_len = 1;
+ rc = lock_get(fd2, &fl);
+ if (rc != 0)
+ return -1;
+ if (fl.l_type != F_UNLCK) {
+ ksft_print_msg("[FAIL] read locks conflicted\n");
+ return -1;
+ }
+ /* Make sure read/write locks do conflict on different fds. */
+ fl.l_type = F_WRLCK;
+ fl.l_start = 5;
+ fl.l_len = 1;
+ rc = lock_get(fd2, &fl);
+ if (rc != 0)
+ return -1;
+ if (fl.l_type != F_UNLCK) {
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[SUCCESS] read and write locks conflicted\n");
+ } else {
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[SUCCESS] read and write locks not conflicted\n");
+ return -1;
+ }
+ /* Get info about the lock on first fd. */
+ fl.l_type = F_UNLCK;
+ fl.l_start = 5;
+ fl.l_len = 1;
+ rc = lock_get(fd, &fl);
+ if (rc != 0) {
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[FAIL] F_OFD_GETLK with F_UNLCK not supported\n");
+ return -1;
+ }
+ if (fl.l_type != F_UNLCK) {
+ if (fl.l_pid != getpid()) {
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[FAIL] F_OFD_GETLK does not return pid, %i\n",
+ fl.l_pid);
+ return -1;
+ }
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[SUCCESS] F_UNLCK test returns: locked, type %i pid %i len %zi\n",
+ fl.l_type, fl.l_pid, fl.l_len);
+ } else {
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[FAIL] F_OFD_GETLK with F_UNLCK did not return lock info\n");
+ return -1;
+ }
+ /* Try the same but by locking everything by len==0. */
+ fl2.l_type = F_UNLCK;
+ fl2.l_start = 0;
+ fl2.l_len = 0;
+ rc = lock_get(fd, &fl2);
+ if (rc != 0) {
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[FAIL] F_OFD_GETLK with F_UNLCK not supported\n");
+ return -1;
+ }
+ if (memcmp(&fl, &fl2, sizeof(fl))) {
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[FAIL] F_UNLCK test returns: locked, type %i pid %i len %zi\n",
+ fl.l_type, fl.l_pid, fl.l_len);
+ return -1;
+ }
+ ksft_print_msg("[SUCCESS] F_UNLCK with len==0 returned the same\n");
+ /* Get info about the lock on second fd - no locks on it. */
+ fl.l_type = F_UNLCK;
+ fl.l_start = 0;
+ fl.l_len = 0;
+ lock_get(fd2, &fl);
+ if (fl.l_type != F_UNLCK) {
+ ksft_print_msg
+ ("[FAIL] F_OFD_GETLK with F_UNLCK return lock info from another fd\n");
+ return -1;
+ }
+ return 0;
+}
--
2.39.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-20 10:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-20 9:55 [PATCH 0/3] RFC: F_OFD_GETLK should provide more info Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 9:55 ` [PATCH 1/3] fs/locks: F_UNLCK extension for F_OFD_GETLK Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 10:46 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 11:00 ` stsp
2023-06-20 11:15 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 15:24 ` stsp
2023-06-20 9:55 ` [PATCH 2/3] fd/locks: allow get the lock owner by F_OFD_GETLK Stas Sergeev
2023-06-20 10:51 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 10:57 ` stsp
2023-06-20 11:12 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 11:45 ` stsp
2023-06-20 12:02 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 12:34 ` stsp
2023-06-20 13:19 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-20 13:39 ` stsp
2023-06-20 13:46 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-20 13:47 ` stsp
2023-06-20 14:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-20 15:45 ` stsp
2023-06-20 17:05 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-06-21 2:54 ` stsp
2023-06-23 13:10 ` David Laight
2023-06-20 13:58 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 6:57 ` stsp
2023-06-21 10:35 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 10:42 ` stsp
2023-06-21 11:05 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-21 11:22 ` stsp
2023-06-21 11:26 ` stsp
2023-06-23 15:25 ` Christian Brauner
2023-06-23 17:18 ` stsp
2023-06-27 16:00 ` Jeff Layton
2023-06-27 16:20 ` stsp
2023-06-20 9:55 ` Stas Sergeev [this message]
2023-06-20 11:06 ` [PATCH 3/3] selftests: add OFD lock tests Jeff Layton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230620095507.2677463-4-stsp2@yandex.ru \
--to=stsp2@yandex.ru \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).