[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <90c28417-3f1d-3a35-c0f9-205b8610ce78@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2020 11:46:58 +0200
From: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@....de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, mtk.manpages@...il.com, shuah@...nel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-man@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] selftests: add readfile(2) selftests
On 7/5/20 9:34 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 03:41:48AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>> On 7/4/20 4:02 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> Test the functionality of readfile(2) in various ways.
>>
>> Hello Greg,
>>
>> I expect readfile() to generate fanotify events FAN_OPEN_PERM, FAN_OPEN,
>> FAN_ACCESS_PERM, FAN_ACCESS, FAN_CLOSE_NOWRITE in this sequence.
>
> Yes, it should, I don't think I do anything unique here when it comes to
> vfs accesses that would go around those events.
>
>> Looking at patch 1/3 you took care of notifications. Would this deserve
>> testing here?
>
> Possibly, do we have other in-tree tests of syscalls that validate those
> events properly being created?
There is an inotify test in
tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_freezer.c
There is no fanotify test in tree test.
An fanotify test will require running with CAP_SYS_ADMIN. The kselftest
documentation does not describe that tests should be run as root. So it
may be preferable to test that the inotify events IN_OPEN, IN_ACCESS,
IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE are created for readfile().
Example coding is included in the inotify.7 and fanotify.7 manpages.
Best regards
Heinrich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists