Hi!
On 09/26/2014 07:23 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" <stanislav.kholmansk...@oracle.com>
>> To: "Xiong Zhou" <xz...@redhat.com>
>> Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 8:07:26 PM
>> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 09/25/2014 11:17 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
>>>
>>> And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
>>> to "negative whence".
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xz...@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> Patch 1 and patch 2 of the series are pushed.
>> Btw, patch 2 didn't apply to index correctly with 'git am', I had to
>> manually apply it.
>>
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience.. I should keep my master branch updated.
>
>> I'm experiencing difficulties with checking patch 3. In particular,
>> after applying your patch utime02 fails on NFSv4 with
>> 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64 kernel.
>
> Yes, I got the same results on 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6 kernel, v3 pass v4 fail.
>
>>
>> I'm not quite sure if it's a kernel problem or test case error. Still
>> investigating.
>>
>> Could you please check the test case in your RHEL 6 environment as well?
>
> I double checked that utime02 did pass on upstream 2.6.32 kernel
> both NFSv3 and NFSv4 in my env.
> On latest RHEL-6 kernel, both NFSv3 and NFSv4 passed utime02 test case.
>
> All failed test_output are just like:
> tst_tmpdir.c:158: chown(/nfsmnt/ltp-6L6Oqow6wv/utiMPq3y5, -1, 0) \
> failed: errno=EPERM(1): Operation not permitted
Sorry, I didn't get whether utime02+NFSv4 passed with the latest RHEL-6
kernel. Could you elaborate on this?
>
> One single clean chown(nfsfile, -1, 0) call to NFSv3/4 file succeeds
> on multiple kernels include 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.
>
> Neither, I'm not sure about where the problem lies. Still checking.
test.c:
#include <error.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
int main(void)
{
if (setuid(99)) {
perror("setuid() failed");
goto out;
}
if (mkdir("dir", 0700)) {
perror("mkdir() failed");
goto out;
}
if (chown("dir", -1, 0))
perror("chown() failed");
out:
return 0;
}
99 is 'nobody'.
With both upstream 2.6.32 and 2.6.32.63 `strace ./test` on a nfsv4 fs
will show:
setuid(99) = 0
mkdir("dir", 0700) = 0
chown("dir", 4294967295, 0) = 0
[root@ol6-x64 nfsv4]# ls -ld dir
drwx------ 2 nobody root 4096 Sep 26 13:14 dir
But with 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64:
setuid(99) = 0
mkdir("dir", 0700) = 0
chown("dir", 4294967295, 0) = -1 EPERM (Operation not permitted)
[root@ol6-x64 nfsv4]# ls -ld dir
drwx------ 2 nobody root 4096 Sep 26 13:19 dir
So, most likely, it's a bug in the vendor kernels.
So on I think that your patch may be pushed.
If there are no objections, I would like to do it on Monday.
Thanks.
>
> Thanks for catching this!
>
> --
> xzhou
>
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer
Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports
Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper
Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
