From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FE5AC4167B for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2022 08:53:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 266913CB98D for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2022 09:53:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (in-2.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94AE63C0F12 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2022 09:53:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 367D76011B4 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2022 09:53:26 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 070C72625B; Fri, 23 Dec 2022 08:53:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1671785605; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=7gpvvAdgK2J1XDC1A4olDel5y5y75vP98fl6495VKJE=; b=kKqb+cHDyhrjVo/m35PPens600BjNC+QooCSiI81/hqBRIJA/NNiHFzZIl5wA1XutonxIY W4lPmSjRDLtbMNbE+d1+6chwyCjU0qkXHyzMvBgAoh+mzejkA0tsZPSF7jVq/4QFGVst3h ekxnMHOJ5xjjFSG043HzQ4pbK8JZ/Mw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1671785605; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=7gpvvAdgK2J1XDC1A4olDel5y5y75vP98fl6495VKJE=; b=6TDmfjQ6bS69fq58V1B1EZx3bFpEgN4+POGD7ft1m9EpPMUywhT+TsfX9VzUbYbYmOMjoi FU5s9r7Dl7FSz1Dw== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D42F113913; Fri, 23 Dec 2022 08:53:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id OeQTMoRspWPGYgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Fri, 23 Dec 2022 08:53:24 +0000 Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2022 09:53:22 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Richard Palethorpe Message-ID: References: <20221221075220.14353-1-akumar@suse.de> <87ili3stt2.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87ili3stt2.fsf@suse.de> X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-2.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] setreuid01.c: Rewrite using new LTP API and use TST_EXP* macros X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > Hello, > Avinesh Kumar writes: > > Hi, > > I changed this simple setreuid() test to new LTP API but I think > > this is a subset of setreuid03.c test and can be removed altogether. > > Please share your opinion. If this should be removed, I'll post new > > patch for that. > Yes, I think that is reasonable. +1. Also setreuid03.c tests as nobody, but we have no garancy setreuid01.c is run as non-root user (it can be root or UID 1000, which has enhanced privileges). Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp