----- Original Message -----
> From: "Zeng Linggang" <[email protected]>
> To: "Jan Stancek" <[email protected]>
> Cc: "ltp-list" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, 3 March, 2014 8:51:19 AM
> Subject: [PATCH v4 3/3] mlock/mlock02.c: add EPERM and ENOMEM errno tests
>
> Add EPERM and ENOMEM errno tests for mlock(2).
>
> Signed-off-by: Zeng Linggang <[email protected]>
> ---
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/mlock/mlock02.c | 82
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 80 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/mlock/mlock02.c
> b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/mlock/mlock02.c
> index a6f99e6..b7579ac 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/mlock/mlock02.c
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/mlock/mlock02.c
> @@ -23,11 +23,20 @@
> * 1. mlock() fails with -1 return value and sets errno to ENOMEM,
> * if some of the specified address range does not correspond to
> * mapped pages in the address space of the process.
> + * 2. mlock() fails with -1 return value and sets errno to ENOMEM,
> + * if (Linux 2.6.9 and later) the caller had a non-zero
> RLIMIT_MEMLOCK
> + * soft resource limit, but tried to lock more memory than the limit
> + * permitted. This limit is not enforced if the process is privileged
> + * (CAP_IPC_LOCK).
> + * 3. mlock() fails with -1 return value and sets errno to EPERM,
> + * if (Linux 2.6.9 and later) the caller was not privileged
> (CAP_IPC_LOCK)
> + * and its RLIMIT_MEMLOCK soft resource limit was 0.
> */
>
> #include <errno.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <sys/mman.h>
> +#include <pwd.h>
>
> #include "test.h"
> #include "usctest.h"
> @@ -40,14 +49,18 @@ char *TCID = "mlock02";
> static void setup(void);
> static void cleanup(void);
> static void test_enomem1(void);
> +static void test_enomem2(void);
> +static void test_eperm(void);
> static void mlock_verify(const void *, const size_t, const int);
>
> static size_t len;
> +static struct rlimit original;
> +static struct passwd *ltpuser;
>
> -static void (*test_func[])(void) = { test_enomem1 };
> +static void (*test_func[])(void) = { test_enomem1, test_enomem2, test_eperm
> };
>
> int TST_TOTAL = ARRAY_SIZE(test_func);
> -static int exp_enos[] = { ENOMEM, 0 };
> +static int exp_enos[] = { ENOMEM, EPERM, 0 };
>
> int main(int ac, char **av)
> {
> @@ -73,11 +86,17 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
>
> static void setup(void)
> {
> + tst_require_root(NULL);
> +
> tst_sig(NOFORK, DEF_HANDLER, cleanup);
>
> TEST_PAUSE;
>
> + ltpuser = SAFE_GETPWNAM(cleanup, "nobody");
> +
> len = getpagesize();
> +
> + SAFE_GETRLIMIT(cleanup, RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, &original);
> }
>
> static void test_enomem1(void)
> @@ -111,6 +130,65 @@ static void test_enomem1(void)
> mlock_verify(addr, len, ENOMEM);
> }
>
> +static void test_enomem2(void)
> +{
> + void *addr;
> + struct rlimit rl;
> +
> + if ((tst_kvercmp(2, 6, 9)) < 0) {
> + tst_resm(TCONF,
> + "ENOMEM error value test for this condition needs "
> + "kernel 2.6.9 or higher");
> + return;
> + }
> +
Hi,
> + rl.rlim_max = len;
> + rl.rlim_cur = len;
"tried to lock more memory than the limit permitted."
You currently allow as much as you try to mlock.
I'd suggest:
- rl.rlim_max = len;
- rl.rlim_cur = len;
+ rl.rlim_max = len - 1;
+ rl.rlim_cur = len - 1;
> + SAFE_SETRLIMIT(cleanup, RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, &rl);
> +
> + addr = SAFE_MMAP(cleanup, NULL, len, PROT_NONE,
Trying to mlock PROT_NONE will give you ENOMEM no matter how big the limit is.
I suggest PROT_READ here.
> + MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, 0, 0);
> +
> + SAFE_SETEUID(cleanup, ltpuser->pw_uid);
> +
> + mlock_verify(&addr, len, ENOMEM);
This is trying to mlock memory location of "addr" variable,
not the area that was just allocated with mmap.
Notice the address passed to mlock() in this strace output:
mmap(NULL, 4096, PROT_NONE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, 0, 0) = 0x7fe39bfbc000
setresuid(-1, 99, -1) = 0
mlock(0x7fff721089a8, 4096) = -1 ENOMEM (Cannot allocate memory)
- mlock_verify(&addr, len, ENOMEM);
+ mlock_verify(addr, len, ENOMEM);
> +
> + SAFE_SETEUID(cleanup, 0);
> +
> + SAFE_MUNMAP(cleanup, addr, len);
> +
> + SAFE_SETRLIMIT(cleanup, RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, &original);
> +}
> +
> +static void test_eperm(void)
> +{
> + void *addr;
> + struct rlimit rl;
> +
> + if ((tst_kvercmp(2, 6, 9)) < 0) {
> + tst_resm(TCONF,
> + "EPERM error value test needs kernel 2.6.9 or higher");
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + rl.rlim_max = 0;
> + rl.rlim_cur = 0;
> + SAFE_SETRLIMIT(cleanup, RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, &rl);
> +
> + addr = SAFE_MMAP(cleanup, NULL, len, PROT_NONE,
> + MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, 0, 0);
> +
> + SAFE_SETEUID(cleanup, ltpuser->pw_uid);
> +
> + mlock_verify(&addr, len, EPERM);
Same as in test_enomem2():
- mlock_verify(&addr, len, EPERM);
+ mlock_verify(addr, len, EPERM);
Regards,
Jan
> +
> + SAFE_SETEUID(cleanup, 0);
> +
> + SAFE_MUNMAP(cleanup, addr, len);
> +
> + SAFE_SETRLIMIT(cleanup, RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, &original);
> +}
> +
> static void mlock_verify(const void *addr, const size_t len, const int
> error)
> {
> TEST(mlock(addr, len));
> --
> 1.8.4.2
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce.
With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works.
Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the
freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
