This 3 patch series consists of fixes to proc_filter test found during linun-next testing.
The first patch fixes the LKFT reported compile error, second one adds .gitignore and the third fixes error paths to skip instead of fail (root check, and argument checks)
Shuah Khan (3): selftests:connector: Fix Makefile to include KHDR_INCLUDES selftests:connector: Add .gitignore and poupulate it with test selftests:connector: Add root check and fix arg error paths to skip
tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore | 1 + tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile | 2 +- tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore
The test compile fails with following errors. Fix the Makefile CFLAGS to include KHDR_INCLUDES to pull in uapi defines.
gcc -Wall proc_filter.c -o ../tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter proc_filter.c: In function ‘send_message’: proc_filter.c:22:33: error: invalid application of ‘sizeof’ to incomplete type ‘struct proc_input’ 22 | sizeof(struct proc_input)) | ^~~~~~ proc_filter.c:42:19: note: in expansion of macro ‘NL_MESSAGE_SIZE’ 42 | char buff[NL_MESSAGE_SIZE]; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ proc_filter.c:22:33: error: invalid application of ‘sizeof’ to incomplete type ‘struct proc_input’ 22 | sizeof(struct proc_input)) | ^~~~~~ proc_filter.c:48:34: note: in expansion of macro ‘NL_MESSAGE_SIZE’ 48 | hdr->nlmsg_len = NL_MESSAGE_SIZE; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ `
Reported-by: Naresh Kamboju naresh.kamboju@linaro.org Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYt=6ysz636XcQ=-KJp7vJcMZ=NjbQBrn77v7vnTcfP... Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org --- tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile index 21c9f3a973a0..92188b9bac5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 -CFLAGS += -Wall +CFLAGS += -Wall $(KHDR_INCLUDES)
TEST_GEN_PROGS = proc_filter
On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The test compile fails with following errors. Fix the Makefile CFLAGS to include KHDR_INCLUDES to pull in uapi defines.
gcc -Wall proc_filter.c -o ../tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter proc_filter.c: In function ‘send_message’: proc_filter.c:22:33: error: invalid application of ‘sizeof’ to incomplete type ‘struct proc_input’ 22 | sizeof(struct proc_input)) | ^~~~~~ proc_filter.c:42:19: note: in expansion of macro ‘NL_MESSAGE_SIZE’ 42 | char buff[NL_MESSAGE_SIZE]; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ proc_filter.c:22:33: error: invalid application of ‘sizeof’ to incomplete type ‘struct proc_input’ 22 | sizeof(struct proc_input)) | ^~~~~~ proc_filter.c:48:34: note: in expansion of macro ‘NL_MESSAGE_SIZE’ 48 | hdr->nlmsg_len = NL_MESSAGE_SIZE; | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ `
Reported-by: Naresh Kamboju naresh.kamboju@linaro.org Link: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA*G9fYt=6ysz636XcQ=... Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org
Reviewed-by: Anjali Kulkarni anjali.k.kulkarni@oracle.com
tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile index 21c9f3a973a0..92188b9bac5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 -CFLAGS += -Wall +CFLAGS += -Wall $(KHDR_INCLUDES)
TEST_GEN_PROGS = proc_filter
-- 2.39.2
Add gitignore and poupulate it with test name - proc_filter
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org --- tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..c90098199a44 --- /dev/null +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +proc_filter
On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
Add gitignore and poupulate it with test name - proc_filter
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org
Reviewed-by: Anjali Kulkarni anjali.k.kulkarni@oracle.com
tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..c90098199a44 --- /dev/null +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore @@ -0,0 +1 @@
+proc_filter
2.39.2
proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their error legs.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org --- tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
if (argc > 2) { printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n"); - exit(1); + exit(KSFT_SKIP); }
if (argc == 2) { @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) filter = 1; } else { printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n"); - exit(1); + exit(KSFT_SKIP); } }
+ if (geteuid()) { + printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n"); + exit(KSFT_SKIP); + } + if (filter) { input.event_type = PROC_EVENT_NONZERO_EXIT; input.mcast_op = PROC_CN_MCAST_LISTEN;
On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their error legs.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
if (argc > 2) { printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n");
exit(1);
exit(KSFT_SKIP);}
if (argc == 2) {
@@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) filter = 1; } else { printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n");
exit(1);
exit(KSFT_SKIP);} }
if (geteuid()) {
printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n");exit(KSFT_SKIP);}
I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run.
Anjali
if (filter) { input.event_type = PROC_EVENT_NONZERO_EXIT; input.mcast_op = PROC_CN_MCAST_LISTEN; -- 2.39.2
On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their error legs.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
if (argc > 2) { printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n");
exit(1);
exit(KSFT_SKIP);}
if (argc == 2) {
@@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) filter = 1; } else { printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n");
exit(1);
exit(KSFT_SKIP);} }
if (geteuid()) {
printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n");exit(KSFT_SKIP);}
I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run.
It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. I had to run it as root.
thanks, -- Shuah
On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their error legs.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
if (argc > 2) { printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n"); - exit(1); + exit(KSFT_SKIP); }
if (argc == 2) { @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) filter = 1; } else { printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n"); - exit(1); + exit(KSFT_SKIP); } }
+ if (geteuid()) { + printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n"); + exit(KSFT_SKIP); + }
I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run.
It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. I had to run it as root.
The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root user:
bind failed: Operation not permitted
thanks, -- Shuah
On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their error legs.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
if (argc > 2) { printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n");
- exit(1);
- exit(KSFT_SKIP);
}
if (argc == 2) { @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) filter = 1; } else { printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n");
- exit(1);
- exit(KSFT_SKIP);
} }
- if (geteuid()) {
- printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n");
- exit(KSFT_SKIP);
- }
I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run.
It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. I had to run it as root.
The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root user:
bind failed: Operation not permitted
Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. So this check for root needs to be removed.
Anjali
thanks, -- Shuah
On 7/28/23 15:21, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their error legs.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
if (argc > 2) { printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n");
- exit(1);
- exit(KSFT_SKIP);
}
if (argc == 2) { @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) filter = 1; } else { printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n");
- exit(1);
- exit(KSFT_SKIP);
} }
- if (geteuid()) {
- printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n");
- exit(KSFT_SKIP);
- }
I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run.
It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. I had to run it as root.
The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root user:
bind failed: Operation not permitted
Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. So this check for root needs to be removed.
I will send v2 for this patch without root check. I should have split the argument error paths and root check anyway.
However, what is strange is if the test run by root, bind() doesn't fail. This doesn't make sense to me based on what you said about bind() fails if kernel doesn't support the new feature.
That sounds like a problem if the test can be run by non-root user and it should fail if kernel doesn't have the feature included. I would think the bind() should fail for root and non-root users.
The bind() failure should be skip if it is an indication of feature not being supported on the kernel.
thanks, -- Shuah
On Jul 28, 2023, at 2:41 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:21, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their error legs.
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
if (argc > 2) { printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n");
- exit(1);
- exit(KSFT_SKIP);
}
if (argc == 2) { @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) filter = 1; } else { printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n");
- exit(1);
- exit(KSFT_SKIP);
} }
- if (geteuid()) {
- printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n");
- exit(KSFT_SKIP);
- }
I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run.
It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. I had to run it as root.
The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root user:
bind failed: Operation not permitted
Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. So this check for root needs to be removed.
I will send v2 for this patch without root check. I should have split the argument error paths and root check anyway.
However, what is strange is if the test run by root, bind() doesn't fail. This doesn't make sense to me based on what you said about bind() fails if kernel doesn't support the new feature.
I didn’t say that - part of the changes introduced by the patches is to remove the root check and add some features on top of existing code.
That sounds like a problem if the test can be run by non-root user and it should fail if kernel doesn't have the feature included. I would think the bind() should fail for root and non-root users.
The bind() failure should be skip if it is an indication of feature not being supported on the kernel.
thanks, -- Shuah
On 7/28/23 15:59, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 2:41 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:21, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check > and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their > error legs. > > Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org > --- > tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c > index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c > @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > > if (argc > 2) { > printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n"); > - exit(1); > + exit(KSFT_SKIP); > } > > if (argc == 2) { > @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > filter = 1; > } else { > printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n"); > - exit(1); > + exit(KSFT_SKIP); > } > } > > + if (geteuid()) { > + printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n"); > + exit(KSFT_SKIP); > + } > +
I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run.
It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. I had to run it as root.
The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root user:
bind failed: Operation not permitted
Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. So this check for root needs to be removed.
I will send v2 for this patch without root check. I should have split the argument error paths and root check anyway.
However, what is strange is if the test run by root, bind() doesn't fail. This doesn't make sense to me based on what you said about bind() fails if kernel doesn't support the new feature.
I didn’t say that - part of the changes introduced by the patches is to remove the root check and add some features on top of existing code.
Okay. So what should happen if a root user runs this test on a kernel that doesn't have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it?
thanks, -- Shuah
On Jul 28, 2023, at 3:25 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:59, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 2:41 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:21, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote: > > >> On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >> >> proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check >> and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their >> error legs. >> >> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >> index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >> @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >> >> if (argc > 2) { >> printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n"); >> - exit(1); >> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >> } >> >> if (argc == 2) { >> @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >> filter = 1; >> } else { >> printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n"); >> - exit(1); >> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >> } >> } >> >> + if (geteuid()) { >> + printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n"); >> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >> + } >> + > > I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run. > It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. I had to run it as root.
The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root user:
bind failed: Operation not permitted
Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. So this check for root needs to be removed.
I will send v2 for this patch without root check. I should have split the argument error paths and root check anyway.
However, what is strange is if the test run by root, bind() doesn't fail. This doesn't make sense to me based on what you said about bind() fails if kernel doesn't support the new feature.
I didn’t say that - part of the changes introduced by the patches is to remove the root check and add some features on top of existing code.
Okay. So what should happen if a root user runs this test on a kernel that doesn't have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it?
It will default to the behavior previous to my changes - that is it will report all events as opposed to a subset of events (which is the new feature added by my change)
Anjali
thanks, -- Shuah
On 7/28/23 16:40, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 3:25 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:59, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 2:41 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:21, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote: >> >> >>> On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >>> >>> proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check >>> and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their >>> error legs. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org >>> --- >>> tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>> index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 >>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>> @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>> >>> if (argc > 2) { >>> printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n"); >>> - exit(1); >>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>> } >>> >>> if (argc == 2) { >>> @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>> filter = 1; >>> } else { >>> printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n"); >>> - exit(1); >>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>> } >>> } >>> >>> + if (geteuid()) { >>> + printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n"); >>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>> + } >>> + >> >> I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run. >> > It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. > I had to run it as root.
The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root user:
bind failed: Operation not permitted
Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. So this check for root needs to be removed.
I will send v2 for this patch without root check. I should have split the argument error paths and root check anyway.
However, what is strange is if the test run by root, bind() doesn't fail. This doesn't make sense to me based on what you said about bind() fails if kernel doesn't support the new feature.
I didn’t say that - part of the changes introduced by the patches is to remove the root check and add some features on top of existing code.
Okay. So what should happen if a root user runs this test on a kernel that doesn't have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it?
It will default to the behavior previous to my changes - that is it will report all events as opposed to a subset of events (which is the new feature added by my change)
Okay. Sorry I am unable to follow this explanation. This test has just been added in commit 73a29531f45fed6423144057d7a844aae46dad9d
Can you please look at the usage for this test:
- What should happen when kernel without filtering is run as root or non-root - What should happen when kernel with filtering is run as root or non-root
There seems to be difference in behavior of this test depending on user privileges. This should reflect in the message the user sees.
This message "bind failed: Operation not permitted" doesn't tell user anything - add a better message. Also this needs to be a skip and not fail.
I just sent v2 without the root check.
thanks, -- Shuah
On Jul 28, 2023, at 4:00 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 16:40, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 3:25 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:59, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 2:41 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:21, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >>>> >>>> proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check >>>> and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their >>>> error legs. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org >>>> --- >>>> tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>> index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 >>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>> @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>>> >>>> if (argc > 2) { >>>> printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n"); >>>> - exit(1); >>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>> } >>>> >>>> if (argc == 2) { >>>> @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>>> filter = 1; >>>> } else { >>>> printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n"); >>>> - exit(1); >>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> + if (geteuid()) { >>>> + printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n"); >>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>> + } >>>> + >>> >>> I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run. >>> >> It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. >> I had to run it as root. > > The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root > user: > > bind failed: Operation not permitted > Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. So this check for root needs to be removed.
I will send v2 for this patch without root check. I should have split the argument error paths and root check anyway.
However, what is strange is if the test run by root, bind() doesn't fail. This doesn't make sense to me based on what you said about bind() fails if kernel doesn't support the new feature.
I didn’t say that - part of the changes introduced by the patches is to remove the root check and add some features on top of existing code.
Okay. So what should happen if a root user runs this test on a kernel that doesn't have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it?
It will default to the behavior previous to my changes - that is it will report all events as opposed to a subset of events (which is the new feature added by my change)
Okay. Sorry I am unable to follow this explanation. This test has just been added in commit 73a29531f45fed6423144057d7a844aae46dad9d
Yes, the test has been added just now, but it also tests kernels previous to the new feature addition. So it is adding a selftest to kernels previous to this commit. That is, the connector module in kernel (before my changes) was sending to a listener user process messages for all process events - fork, exit, exec etc. This was only being done if the user process was run as root. With my changes, we add filtering based on an option added by user, which filters based on input and gives back to the user only fork, or only exit, or a combination of those. This is a new feature added. In addition to this filtering, we have also made the change to allow user process to be non-root when receiving these messages.
Can you please look at the usage for this test:
- What should happen when kernel without filtering is run as
root or non-root
By kernel without filtering you mean a kernel without my patches? In that case, it should run only as root - non-root should fail. In this case, it falls back to default behavior before my change, where listener user process gets all messages related to process events. I have not tested this a lot, I am working on testing this on a kernel without my changes.
- What should happen when kernel with filtering is run as
root or non-root
It should allow non-root user as well as root user to listen to events based on what they want to listen to.
There seems to be difference in behavior of this test depending on user privileges. This should reflect in the message the user sees.
That’s because I am allowing this test to work with new changes as well as allow old method to work. Old method is invoked without any arguments supplied to this program. -f option invokes new filtering.
This message "bind failed: Operation not permitted" doesn't tell user anything - add a better message. Also this needs to be a skip and not fail.
Will do.
I just sent v2 without the root check.
thanks, -- Shuah
On 7/28/23 18:19, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 4:00 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 16:40, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 3:25 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:59, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 2:41 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:21, Anjali Kulkarni wrote: >> On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >> >> On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote: >>> On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >>>>> >>>>> proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check >>>>> and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their >>>>> error legs. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org >>>>> --- >>>>> tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- >>>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>>> index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 >>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>>> @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>>>> >>>>> if (argc > 2) { >>>>> printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n"); >>>>> - exit(1); >>>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> if (argc == 2) { >>>>> @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>>>> filter = 1; >>>>> } else { >>>>> printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n"); >>>>> - exit(1); >>>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> + if (geteuid()) { >>>>> + printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n"); >>>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>>> + } >>>>> + >>>> >>>> I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run. >>>> >>> It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. >>> I had to run it as root. >> >> The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root >> user: >> >> bind failed: Operation not permitted >> > Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. > So this check for root needs to be removed.
I will send v2 for this patch without root check. I should have split the argument error paths and root check anyway.
However, what is strange is if the test run by root, bind() doesn't fail. This doesn't make sense to me based on what you said about bind() fails if kernel doesn't support the new feature.
I didn’t say that - part of the changes introduced by the patches is to remove the root check and add some features on top of existing code.
Okay. So what should happen if a root user runs this test on a kernel that doesn't have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it?
It will default to the behavior previous to my changes - that is it will report all events as opposed to a subset of events (which is the new feature added by my change)
Okay. Sorry I am unable to follow this explanation. This test has just been added in commit 73a29531f45fed6423144057d7a844aae46dad9d
Yes, the test has been added just now, but it also tests kernels previous to the new feature addition. So it is adding a selftest to kernels previous to this commit. That is, the connector module in kernel (before my changes) was sending to a listener user process messages for all process events - fork, exit, exec etc. This was only being done if the user process was run as root. With my changes, we add filtering based on an option added by user, which filters based on input and gives back to the user only fork, or only exit, or a combination of those. This is a new feature added. In addition to this filtering, we have also made the change to allow user process to be non-root when receiving these messages.
Can you please look at the usage for this test:
- What should happen when kernel without filtering is run as
root or non-root
By kernel without filtering you mean a kernel without my patches? In that case, it should run only as root - non-root should fail. In this case, it falls back to default behavior before my change, where listener user process gets all messages related to process events. I have not tested this a lot, I am working on testing this on a kernel without my changes.
Then you definitely need better messages when bind() fails on kernels without the feature. It has to be clear to the user why the test is exiting without running.
So this is what is needed: - Check if the test can be run as non-root (whatever that means) - It is still not clear to me if bind() fails does that mean the kernel doesn't doesn't support the new feature.
Since this test essentially behaves differently when the feature is supported vs. not. So it has to behave consistently somehow checking for the feature and report correctly.
thanks, -- Shuah
On Jul 28, 2023, at 5:32 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 18:19, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 4:00 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 16:40, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 3:25 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:59, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2023, at 2:41 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > On 7/28/23 15:21, Anjali Kulkarni wrote: >>> On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >>> >>> On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote: >>>> On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check >>>>>> and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their >>>>>> error legs. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org >>>>>> --- >>>>>> tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>>>> index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 >>>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>>>> @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>>>>> >>>>>> if (argc > 2) { >>>>>> printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n"); >>>>>> - exit(1); >>>>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> if (argc == 2) { >>>>>> @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>>>>> filter = 1; >>>>>> } else { >>>>>> printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n"); >>>>>> - exit(1); >>>>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>>>> } >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> + if (geteuid()) { >>>>>> + printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n"); >>>>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>>>> + } >>>>>> + >>>>> >>>>> I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run. >>>>> >>>> It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. >>>> I had to run it as root. >>> >>> The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root >>> user: >>> >>> bind failed: Operation not permitted >>> >> Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. >> So this check for root needs to be removed. > > I will send v2 for this patch without root check. I should have > split the argument error paths and root check anyway. > > However, what is strange is if the test run by root, bind() doesn't fail. > This doesn't make sense to me based on what you said about bind() fails > if kernel doesn't support the new feature. > I didn’t say that - part of the changes introduced by the patches is to remove the root check and add some features on top of existing code.
Okay. So what should happen if a root user runs this test on a kernel that doesn't have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it?
It will default to the behavior previous to my changes - that is it will report all events as opposed to a subset of events (which is the new feature added by my change)
Okay. Sorry I am unable to follow this explanation. This test has just been added in commit 73a29531f45fed6423144057d7a844aae46dad9d
Yes, the test has been added just now, but it also tests kernels previous to the new feature addition. So it is adding a selftest to kernels previous to this commit. That is, the connector module in kernel (before my changes) was sending to a listener user process messages for all process events - fork, exit, exec etc. This was only being done if the user process was run as root. With my changes, we add filtering based on an option added by user, which filters based on input and gives back to the user only fork, or only exit, or a combination of those. This is a new feature added. In addition to this filtering, we have also made the change to allow user process to be non-root when receiving these messages.
Can you please look at the usage for this test:
- What should happen when kernel without filtering is run as
root or non-root
By kernel without filtering you mean a kernel without my patches? In that case, it should run only as root - non-root should fail. In this case, it falls back to default behavior before my change, where listener user process gets all messages related to process events. I have not tested this a lot, I am working on testing this on a kernel without my changes.
Then you definitely need better messages when bind() fails on kernels without the feature. It has to be clear to the user why the test is exiting without running.
So this is what is needed:
- Check if the test can be run as non-root (whatever that means)
Not sure what you mean by this?
- It is still not clear to me if bind() fails does that mean the
kernel doesn't doesn't support the new feature.
It means you need to be root to run the program - this is the expected behavior on kernels which do not have my change(to allow non-root access). So, today if you wrote a program to test basic connector code without filtering(without my changes) - this is how it would respond. This is a check in the kernel(without my changes) which makes bind fail if user is non-root. With my change this change has been effectively removed.
Anjali
Since this test essentially behaves differently when the feature is supported vs. not. So it has to behave consistently somehow checking for the feature and report correctly.
thanks, -- Shuah
On Jul 28, 2023, at 5:32 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 18:19, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 4:00 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 16:40, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
On Jul 28, 2023, at 3:25 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 7/28/23 15:59, Anjali Kulkarni wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2023, at 2:41 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > On 7/28/23 15:21, Anjali Kulkarni wrote: >>> On Jul 28, 2023, at 12:44 PM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >>> >>> On 7/28/23 13:06, Shuah Khan wrote: >>>> On 7/28/23 12:10, Anjali Kulkarni wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 28, 2023, at 10:29 AM, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> proc_filter test requires root privileges. Add root privilege check >>>>>> and skip the test. Also fix argument parsing paths to skip in their >>>>>> error legs. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org >>>>>> --- >>>>>> tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++-- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>>>> index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644 >>>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c >>>>>> @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>>>>> >>>>>> if (argc > 2) { >>>>>> printf("Expected 0(assume no-filter) or 1 argument(-f)\n"); >>>>>> - exit(1); >>>>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> if (argc == 2) { >>>>>> @@ -256,10 +256,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) >>>>>> filter = 1; >>>>>> } else { >>>>>> printf("Valid option : -f (for filter feature)\n"); >>>>>> - exit(1); >>>>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>>>> } >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> + if (geteuid()) { >>>>>> + printf("Connector test requires root privileges.\n"); >>>>>> + exit(KSFT_SKIP); >>>>>> + } >>>>>> + >>>>> >>>>> I am not sure why you have added this check? proc_filter does not need root privilege to run. >>>>> >>>> It failed for me when I ran it saying it requires root privileges. >>>> I had to run it as root. >>> >>> The following is what I see when I run the test as non-root >>> user: >>> >>> bind failed: Operation not permitted >>> >> Yes, that’s expected on a kernel which does not have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it. >> So this check for root needs to be removed. > > I will send v2 for this patch without root check. I should have > split the argument error paths and root check anyway. > > However, what is strange is if the test run by root, bind() doesn't fail. > This doesn't make sense to me based on what you said about bind() fails > if kernel doesn't support the new feature. > I didn’t say that - part of the changes introduced by the patches is to remove the root check and add some features on top of existing code.
Okay. So what should happen if a root user runs this test on a kernel that doesn't have the kernel patches submitted with this selftest installed on it?
It will default to the behavior previous to my changes - that is it will report all events as opposed to a subset of events (which is the new feature added by my change)
Okay. Sorry I am unable to follow this explanation. This test has just been added in commit 73a29531f45fed6423144057d7a844aae46dad9d
Yes, the test has been added just now, but it also tests kernels previous to the new feature addition. So it is adding a selftest to kernels previous to this commit. That is, the connector module in kernel (before my changes) was sending to a listener user process messages for all process events - fork, exit, exec etc. This was only being done if the user process was run as root. With my changes, we add filtering based on an option added by user, which filters based on input and gives back to the user only fork, or only exit, or a combination of those. This is a new feature added. In addition to this filtering, we have also made the change to allow user process to be non-root when receiving these messages.
Can you please look at the usage for this test:
- What should happen when kernel without filtering is run as
root or non-root
By kernel without filtering you mean a kernel without my patches? In that case, it should run only as root - non-root should fail. In this case, it falls back to default behavior before my change, where listener user process gets all messages related to process events. I have not tested this a lot, I am working on testing this on a kernel without my changes.
Then you definitely need better messages when bind() fails on kernels without the feature. It has to be clear to the user why the test is exiting without running.
So this is what is needed:
- Check if the test can be run as non-root (whatever that means)
- It is still not clear to me if bind() fails does that mean the
kernel doesn't doesn't support the new feature.
Since this test essentially behaves differently when the feature is supported vs. not. So it has to behave consistently somehow checking for the feature and report correctly.
Yes, that is intentional. When the feature is supported, we allow non-root access, which is part of what the feature added. If not supported (older kernel) then only root access allowed. Since I am supporting both modes in same program, it will behave differently.
thanks, -- Shuah
Hello:
This series was applied to netdev/net-next.git (main) by Jakub Kicinski kuba@kernel.org:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 11:29:25 -0600 you wrote:
This 3 patch series consists of fixes to proc_filter test found during linun-next testing.
The first patch fixes the LKFT reported compile error, second one adds .gitignore and the third fixes error paths to skip instead of fail (root check, and argument checks)
[...]
Here is the summary with links: - [next,1/3] selftests:connector: Fix Makefile to include KHDR_INCLUDES https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/165f6890586e - [next,2/3] selftests:connector: Add .gitignore and poupulate it with test https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/f4dcfa6fa1a8
You are awesome, thank you!
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Anjali Kulkarni -
patchwork-bot+netdevbpf＠kernel.org -
Shuah Khan