Dzień dobry,
dostrzegam możliwość współpracy z Państwa firmą.
Świadczymy kompleksową obsługę inwestycji w fotowoltaikę, która obniża koszty energii elektrycznej nawet o 90%.
Czy są Państwo zainteresowani weryfikacją wstępnych propozycji?
Pozdrawiam,
Jakub Daroch
The list_del_init_careful() function was added[1] after the list KUnit
test. Add a very basic test to cover it.
Note that this test only covers the single-threaded behaviour (which
matches list_del_init()), as is already the case with the test for
list_empty_careful().
[1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?…
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow(a)google.com>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko(a)linux.intel.com>
---
Changes since v3:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220209052813.854014-1-davidgow@google.com/
- Fix a comment style issue.
- Add Reviewed-by tags.
Changes since v2:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220208040122.695258-1-davidgow@go…
- Fix the test calling list_del_init() instead of
list_del_init_careful()
- Improve the comment noting we only test single-threaded behaviour.
Changes since v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220205061539.273330-1-davidgow@go…
- Patch 1/3 unchanged
---
lib/list-test.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/list-test.c b/lib/list-test.c
index ee09505df16f..302b7382bff4 100644
--- a/lib/list-test.c
+++ b/lib/list-test.c
@@ -161,6 +161,26 @@ static void list_test_list_del_init(struct kunit *test)
KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, list_empty_careful(&a));
}
+static void list_test_list_del_init_careful(struct kunit *test)
+{
+ /* NOTE: This test only checks the behaviour of this function in
+ * isolation. It does not verify memory model guarantees.
+ */
+ struct list_head a, b;
+ LIST_HEAD(list);
+
+ list_add_tail(&a, &list);
+ list_add_tail(&b, &list);
+
+ /* before: [list] -> a -> b */
+ list_del_init_careful(&a);
+ /* after: [list] -> b, a initialised */
+
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, list.next, &b);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, b.prev, &list);
+ KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, list_empty_careful(&a));
+}
+
static void list_test_list_move(struct kunit *test)
{
struct list_head a, b;
@@ -707,6 +727,7 @@ static struct kunit_case list_test_cases[] = {
KUNIT_CASE(list_test_list_replace_init),
KUNIT_CASE(list_test_list_swap),
KUNIT_CASE(list_test_list_del_init),
+ KUNIT_CASE(list_test_list_del_init_careful),
KUNIT_CASE(list_test_list_move),
KUNIT_CASE(list_test_list_move_tail),
KUNIT_CASE(list_test_list_bulk_move_tail),
--
2.35.1.574.g5d30c73bfb-goog
This series is a result of looking deeper into breakage of
tools/testing/selftests/rlimits/rlimits-per-userns.c after
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220204181144.24462-1-mkoutny@suse.com/
is applied.
The description of the original problem that lead to RLIMIT_NPROC et al.
ucounts rewrite could be ambiguously interpretted as supporting either
the case of:
- never-fork service or
- fork (RLIMIT_NPROC-1) times service.
The scenario is weird anyway given existence of pids controller.
The realization of that scenario relies not only on tracking number of
processes per user_ns but also newly allows the root to override limit through
set*uid. The commit message didn't mention that, so it's unclear if it
was the intention too.
I also noticed that the RLIMIT_NPROC enforcing in fork seems subject to TOCTOU
race (check(nr_tasks),...,nr_tasks++) so the limit is rather advisory (but
that's not a new thing related to ucounts rewrite).
This series is RFC to discuss relevance of the subtle changes RLIMIT_NPROC to
ucounts rewrite introduced.
Michal Koutný (6):
set_user: Perform RLIMIT_NPROC capability check against new user
credentials
set*uid: Check RLIMIT_PROC against new credentials
cred: Count tasks by their real uid into RLIMIT_NPROC
ucounts: Allow root to override RLIMIT_NPROC
selftests: Challenge RLIMIT_NPROC in user namespaces
selftests: Test RLIMIT_NPROC in clone-created user namespaces
fs/exec.c | 2 +-
include/linux/cred.h | 2 +-
kernel/cred.c | 29 ++-
kernel/fork.c | 2 +-
kernel/sys.c | 20 +-
kernel/ucount.c | 3 +
kernel/user_namespace.c | 2 +-
.../selftests/rlimits/rlimits-per-userns.c | 233 +++++++++++++++---
8 files changed, 229 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
--
2.34.1
Use a more idiomatic check that a list is non-empty (`if mylist:`) and
sinmplify the function body by dedenting and using a dict to map between
the kunit TestStatus enum => KernelCI json status string.
The dict hopefully makes it less likely to have bugs like commit
9a6bb30a8830 ("kunit: tool: fix --json output for skipped tests").
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov(a)google.com>
---
Note: this series is based on my earlier set of kunit tool cleanups for
5.18, https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220118190922.1557074-1-dlatypov@g…
There's no interesting semantic dependency, just some boring merge
conflicts, specifically with patch #4 there, https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20220118190922.1557074-5-dlatypov@g…
---
tools/testing/kunit/kunit_json.py | 20 ++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_json.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_json.py
index 24d103049bca..14a480d3308a 100644
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_json.py
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_json.py
@@ -16,24 +16,24 @@ from typing import Any, Dict
JsonObj = Dict[str, Any]
+_status_map: Dict[TestStatus, str] = {
+ TestStatus.SUCCESS: "PASS",
+ TestStatus.SKIPPED: "SKIP",
+ TestStatus.TEST_CRASHED: "ERROR",
+}
+
def _get_group_json(test: Test, def_config: str, build_dir: str) -> JsonObj:
sub_groups = [] # List[JsonObj]
test_cases = [] # List[JsonObj]
for subtest in test.subtests:
- if len(subtest.subtests):
+ if subtest.subtests:
sub_group = _get_group_json(subtest, def_config,
build_dir)
sub_groups.append(sub_group)
- else:
- test_case = {"name": subtest.name, "status": "FAIL"}
- if subtest.status == TestStatus.SUCCESS:
- test_case["status"] = "PASS"
- elif subtest.status == TestStatus.SKIPPED:
- test_case["status"] = "SKIP"
- elif subtest.status == TestStatus.TEST_CRASHED:
- test_case["status"] = "ERROR"
- test_cases.append(test_case)
+ continue
+ status = _status_map.get(subtest.status, "FAIL")
+ test_cases.append({"name": subtest.name, "status": status})
test_group = {
"name": test.name,
--
2.35.1.473.g83b2b277ed-goog