Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

While there, it does not build for me: /usr/src/tests/kernel/h_fexecve.c: In function 'main': /usr/src/tests/kernel/h_fexecve.c:48:6: error: implicit declaration of function 'fexecve'; did you mean 'execve'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] if (fexecve(fd, args, NULL) == -1)

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

I have got no opinion, but merging them is good. Personally I prefer src/libc/* path as fexecve(2) is a libc public symbol. On 15.09.2019 20:06, Christos Zoulas wrote: > The tests are a different. Should we keep them both, or try to merge them? > I think that merging them is probably better. It

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

The tests are a different. Should we keep them both, or try to merge them? I think that merging them is probably better. It is also the case that perhaps we need to get rid of the kernel tests directory and move them to the respective bin and lib directories to avoid confusion? christos > On Sep

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 15.09.2019 18:53, Christos Zoulas wrote: > Module Name: src > Committed By: christos > Date: Sun Sep 15 16:53:58 UTC 2019 > > Modified Files: > src/tests/kernel: Makefile > Added Files: > src/tests/kernel: h_fexecve.c t_fexecve.sh > > Log Message: > Add tests for

re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

> Modified Files: > src/tests/kernel: t_timeleft.c > > Log Message: > add call error checks, requested by mrg@ thanks!

re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Jan 14, 9:29am, m...@eterna.com.au (matthew green) wrote: -- Subject: re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel | "Christos Zoulas" writes: | > Module Name:src | > Committed By: christos | > Date: Sun Jan 13 15:36:57 UTC 2019 | > | > Modified

re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

"Christos Zoulas" writes: > Module Name: src > Committed By: christos > Date: Sun Jan 13 15:36:57 UTC 2019 > > Modified Files: > src/tests/kernel: t_timeleft.c > > Log Message: > Increase the timeout a bit, and make sure we join so that there is no > race. i notice both

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

In article <0a6e53d7-4f6e-6e25-cd61-2342e1c4e...@gmx.com>, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- >-=-=-=-=-=- > >On 06.12.2016 19:59, Christos Zoulas wrote: >> Module Name: src >> Committed By:christos >> Date:Tue Dec 6 18:59:00 UTC 2016 >> >> Modified

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 06.12.2016 19:59, Christos Zoulas wrote: > Module Name: src > Committed By: christos > Date: Tue Dec 6 18:59:00 UTC 2016 > > Modified Files: > src/tests/kernel: t_ptrace_wait.c > > Log Message: > switch to using fork so we can see the child output. > atf_utils_fork() still

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Nov 26, 3:24am, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote: -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel | PT_READ_D and PT_READ_I read single int according to documentation. | | In tests io_read_d* io_read_i* data blocks are printed with appropriate | PRIxN. | | I cannot spot a mistake

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 25.11.2016 23:41, Christos Zoulas wrote: > In article , > Christos Zoulas wrote: >> In article <20161125200105.5dbb4f...@cvs.netbsd.org>, >> Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >>> -=-=-=-=-=- >>> >>> Module Name:

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

In article <20161125200105.5dbb4f...@cvs.netbsd.org>, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >Module Name: src >Committed By: kamil >Date: Fri Nov 25 20:01:05 UTC 2016 > >Modified Files: > src/tests/kernel: t_ptrace_wait.c > >Log Message: >Fix

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 10.11.2016 03:44, matthew green wrote: > it would actually be useful to have a testcase that ran iff > root *and* securelevel >= 0 and tests it is unable to attach > to pid 1. > > thanks. > > > .mrg. > OK, I will have a look at it. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

it would actually be useful to have a testcase that ran iff root *and* securelevel >= 0 and tests it is unable to attach to pid 1. thanks. .mrg.

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 10.11.2016 03:28, Paul Goyette wrote: > On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, matthew green wrote: > also, root can't attach to pid1 if securelevel is >= 0. >>> >>> To adjust securelevel this test would need to be modified to run under >>> rump ... We wouldn't want the test to manipulate securelevel of

re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, matthew green wrote: also, root can't attach to pid1 if securelevel is >= 0. To adjust securelevel this test would need to be modified to run under rump ... We wouldn't want the test to manipulate securelevel of the running system. s/wouldn't want/*can't* by design

re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

> >> Log Message: > >> Add new tests attach_pid0 and attach_pid1 to t_ptrace > >> > >> attach_pid0 asserts that it is not valid to attach PID 0 as it is a special > >> kernel process. > >> > >> assert_pid1 asserts that non-root user cannot attach to PID 1 as it is the > >> /dev/init process. This

re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Thu, 10 Nov 2016, matthew green wrote: "Kamil Rytarowski" writes: Module Name:src Committed By: kamil Date: Sun Nov 6 16:24:16 UTC 2016 Modified Files: src/tests/kernel: t_ptrace.c Log Message: Add new tests attach_pid0 and attach_pid1 to t_ptrace attach_pid0

re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

"Kamil Rytarowski" writes: > Module Name: src > Committed By: kamil > Date: Sun Nov 6 16:24:16 UTC 2016 > > Modified Files: > src/tests/kernel: t_ptrace.c > > Log Message: > Add new tests attach_pid0 and attach_pid1 to t_ptrace > > attach_pid0 asserts that it is not valid to

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 06.11.2016 18:26, Nicolas Joly wrote: > On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 11:56:31PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: >> Date:Sun, 6 Nov 2016 16:24:16 + >> From:"Kamil Rytarowski" >> Message-ID: <20161106162416.95d77f...@cvs.netbsd.org> >> >> | assert_pid1

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 11:56:31PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: > Date:Sun, 6 Nov 2016 16:24:16 + > From:"Kamil Rytarowski" > Message-ID: <20161106162416.95d77f...@cvs.netbsd.org> > > | assert_pid1 asserts that non-root user cannot attach to PID 1

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 06.11.2016 17:56, Robert Elz wrote: > Date:Sun, 6 Nov 2016 16:24:16 + > From:"Kamil Rytarowski" > Message-ID: <20161106162416.95d77f...@cvs.netbsd.org> > > | assert_pid1 asserts that non-root user cannot attach to PID 1 as it is the > |

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

Date:Sun, 6 Nov 2016 16:24:16 + From:"Kamil Rytarowski" Message-ID: <20161106162416.95d77f...@cvs.netbsd.org> | assert_pid1 asserts that non-root user cannot attach to PID 1 as it is the | /dev/init process. This tests is skipped if run as

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Nov 6, 1:48pm, n...@gmx.com (Kamil Rytarowski) wrote: -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel | My plan is to split t_ptrace into t_ptrace_wait, t_ptrace_waitpid etc. I | will try to avoid duplication of the code and prepare something like the | t_mutex and t_timedmutex pair

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 03.11.2016 18:08, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > > For now I'm focusing on functional tests, which are equivalent to > FreeBSD capabilities. This is why I will reschedule combination of > wait(2) usage functions for later and move to on other ptrace(2) use-cases. > With recent reported issues I'm

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 03.11.2016 15:24, Christos Zoulas wrote: > In article <19801.1478175...@andromeda.noi.kre.to>, > Robert Elz wrote: >> >> Which is actually correct? (That is, which makes more sense, if it is >> not actually specified somewhere.) >> >> Please make the tests test correct

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

In article <19801.1478175...@andromeda.noi.kre.to>, Robert Elz wrote: > >Which is actually correct? (That is, which makes more sense, if it is >not actually specified somewhere.) > >Please make the tests test correct behaviour, not just what NetBSD happens >to do today.

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

Date:Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:20:45 + From:"Kamil Rytarowski" Message-ID: <20161103112045.a48aaf...@cvs.netbsd.org> | This test verifies calling raise(2) with the SIGCONT argument in the child. | The parent is notified with it and asserts that

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 07:24:39PM -0800, Paul Goyette wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: Wait a little bit after fork()ing the lockers to give them a chance to get started before trying to ptrace(ATTACH). What about using a pipe to make this an explicit barrier?

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

Most of the printf's were already there before this round of updates, and there's enough differentiation in them to figure out which process is responsible. In any case, the printf's aren't critical to the test (until you need to debug it!). So for now, I'd rather just leave them all alone.

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:40:22AM -0800, Paul Goyette wrote: Most of the printf's were already there before this round of updates, and there's enough differentiation in them to figure out which process is responsible. In any case, the printf's aren't critical to the test (until you need to

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:40:22AM -0800, Paul Goyette wrote: Most of the printf's were already there before this round of updates, and there's enough differentiation in them to figure out which process is

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 02:45:43PM -0500, Julio Merino wrote: On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote: On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:40:22AM -0800, Paul Goyette wrote: Most of the printf's were already there before this round of updates, and there's

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

In article 20130219224428.5dd5717...@cvs.netbsd.org, Paul Goyette source-changes-d@NetBSD.org wrote: -=-=-=-=-=- + const char *pipe_errmsg = child: pipe write failed\n; (void)unlink(lockfile); @@ -145,8 +146,8 @@ ATF_TC_BODY(randlock, tc) switch (pid[i]) {

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:54:48AM +, Paul Goyette wrote: Module Name: src Committed By: pgoyette Date: Tue Feb 19 00:54:48 UTC 2013 Modified Files: src/tests/kernel: t_lockf.c Log Message: Wait a little bit after fork()ing the lockers to give them a chance to get

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: Wait a little bit after fork()ing the lockers to give them a chance to get started before trying to ptrace(ATTACH). What about using a pipe to make this an explicit barrier? You mean something like this?:) Index: t_lockf.c

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 04:53:21PM +0100, Julio Merino wrote: One thing is reorganizing the tests to match the tree structure, but the other is to move the tests right next to the source I don't quite understand the latter part. Why is this a bad thing? I always thought that having a single

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 5/31/11 7:06 PM, Jukka Ruohonen wrote: On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 04:53:21PM +0100, Julio Merino wrote: One thing is reorganizing the tests to match the tree structure, but the other is to move the tests right next to the source I don't quite understand the latter part. Why is this a bad

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On 5/28/11 4:37 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote: Module Name:src Committed By: christos Date: Sat May 28 15:37:11 UTC 2011 Modified Files: src/tests/kernel: t_pollts.c Log Message: PR/44896 has been fixed. BTW: We've created a mess here again with the directory structure of

Re: CVS commit: src/tests/kernel

On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Julio Merino j...@netbsd.org wrote: On 5/28/11 4:37 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote: Module Name:    src Committed By:   christos Date:           Sat May 28 15:37:11 UTC 2011 Modified Files:        src/tests/kernel: t_pollts.c Log Message: PR/44896 has been