[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+G9fYuq7bpDhY3cA5O66bf0nxKUkbtiTMcLMqBYvWKLhNfrjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 06:33:12 +0530
From: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
chrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>, Jan Stancek <jstancek@...hat.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Petr Vorel <pvorel@...e.cz>,
Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@...e.com>,
Joerg.Vehlow@...-tech.de
Subject: Re: LTP: madvise08.c:203: TFAIL: No sequence in dump after MADV_DODUMP.
On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 at 20:05, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 02:11:15PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
>
> > fs/coredump.c:903:9: error: 'return' with a value, in function
> > returning void [-Werror=return-type]
> > 903 | return 0;
> > | ^
> >
> > Build failed due to above error.
>
> FWIW, here the test results in
> Running tests.......
> <<<test_start>>>
> tag=madvise08 stime=1613398818
> cmdline="madvise08"
> contacts=""
> analysis=exit
> <<<test_output>>>
> incrementing stop
> tst_test.c:1250: TINFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s
> madvise08.c:78: TINFO: Temporary core pattern is '/tmp/ltp-tgvQ3Lz1UZ/B6lwy6/dump-%p'
> madvise08.c:117: TINFO: Dump file should be dump-2276
> madvise08.c:201: TPASS: madvise(..., MADV_DONTDUMP)
> madvise08.c:117: TINFO: Dump file should be dump-2277
> madvise08.c:205: TPASS: madvise(..., MADV_DODUMP)
>
> Summary:
> passed 2
> failed 0
> skipped 0
> warnings 0
> <<<execution_status>>>
> initiation_status="ok"
> duration=0 termination_type=exited termination_id=0 corefile=no
> cutime=0 cstime=0
> <<<test_end>>>
>
> (built without -Werror=return-type, so I'd missed the warnings)
>
> Anyway, I've folded the fix (with those stray return 0 removed, of course)
> into #work.coredump and #for-next; works here. Could you test either
> branch (in git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/viro/vfs.git)?
By using Linaro tuxsuite [1] I have built your tree and tested on x86_64 and
the reported test PASS now.
LTP syscalls [2] and LTP fs [3] tested on x86_64 and both PASS.
Tested-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
[1] https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tuxsuite
[2] https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/results/2278012
[3] https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/results/2280979
- Naresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists