diff mbox series

syscalls/copy_file_range02: Add check for pipe

Message ID 20191008151624.19815-1-chrubis@suse.cz
State Accepted
Headers show
Series syscalls/copy_file_range02: Add check for pipe | expand

Commit Message

Cyril Hrubis Oct. 8, 2019, 3:16 p.m. UTC 
The original patch that was adding this fell under a table:

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1112976/

I guess there is no harm checking that we get EINVAL for pipe as well,
or does anyone disagree?

Signed-off-by: Jinhui huang <huangjh.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
CC: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
---
 .../syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02.c   | 14 ++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Jan Stancek Oct. 9, 2019, 8:36 a.m. UTC | #1 
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cyril Hrubis" <chrubis@suse.cz>
> To: ltp@lists.linux.it
> Sent: Tuesday, 8 October, 2019 5:16:24 PM
> Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/copy_file_range02: Add check for pipe
> 
> The original patch that was adding this fell under a table:
> 
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1112976/
> 
> I guess there is no harm checking that we get EINVAL for pipe as well,
> or does anyone disagree?

Do you know what is kernel behaviour prior to commit 11cbfb10775a ?
Does it pass/fail/crash/different errno?
Cyril Hrubis Oct. 9, 2019, 9:11 a.m. UTC | #2 
Hi!
> > The original patch that was adding this fell under a table:
> > 
> > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1112976/
> > 
> > I guess there is no harm checking that we get EINVAL for pipe as well,
> > or does anyone disagree?
> 
> Do you know what is kernel behaviour prior to commit 11cbfb10775a ?
> Does it pass/fail/crash/different errno?

The test is disabled unless cross FS copy support is implemented in
kernel, so the test is disabled for anything older than v5.3 anyways.
Jan Stancek Oct. 9, 2019, 12:48 p.m. UTC | #3 
----- Original Message -----
> Hi!
> > > The original patch that was adding this fell under a table:
> > > 
> > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1112976/
> > > 
> > > I guess there is no harm checking that we get EINVAL for pipe as well,
> > > or does anyone disagree?
> > 
> > Do you know what is kernel behaviour prior to commit 11cbfb10775a ?
> > Does it pass/fail/crash/different errno?
> 
> The test is disabled unless cross FS copy support is implemented in
> kernel, so the test is disabled for anything older than v5.3 anyways.

Thanks, I don't see any potential issues then, ACK.
Cyril Hrubis Oct. 10, 2019, 1:04 p.m. UTC | #4 
Hi!
Pushed, thanks.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02.c
index 6e385adbd..a55de4111 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02.c
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02.c
@@ -25,9 +25,10 @@ 
  * 9) Try to copy contents to a blkdev ->EINVAL
  * 10) Try to copy contents to a chardev ->EINVAL
  * 11) Try to copy contents to a FIFO ->EINVAL
- * 12) Try to copy contents to a file with length beyond
+ * 12) Try to copy contenst to a PIPE ->EINVAL
+ * 13) Try to copy contents to a file with length beyond
  *     16EiB wraps around 0 -> EOVERFLOW
- * 13) Try to copy contents to a file with target file range
+ * 14) Try to copy contents to a file with target file range
  *     beyond maximum supported file size ->EFBIG
  */
 
@@ -48,6 +49,7 @@  static int fd_dup;
 static int fd_blkdev;
 static int fd_chrdev;
 static int fd_fifo;
+static int fd_pipe[2];
 static int fd_copy;
 static int need_unlink;
 
@@ -73,6 +75,7 @@  static struct tcase {
 	{&fd_blkdev,	0,	EINVAL,		CONTSIZE,	"block device"},
 	{&fd_chrdev,	0,	EINVAL,		CONTSIZE,	"char device"},
 	{&fd_fifo,	0,	EINVAL,		CONTSIZE,	"fifo"},
+	{&fd_pipe[0],	0,	EINVAL,		CONTSIZE,	"pipe"},
 	{&fd_copy,	0,	EOVERFLOW,	ULLONG_MAX,	"max length lenght"},
 	{&fd_copy,	0,	EFBIG,		MIN_OFF,	"max file size"},
 };
@@ -163,6 +166,11 @@  static void cleanup(void)
 		SAFE_CLOSE(fd_copy);
 	if (need_unlink > 0)
 		SAFE_UNLINK(FILE_FIFO);
+
+	if (fd_pipe[0] > 0) {
+		SAFE_CLOSE(fd_pipe[0]);
+		SAFE_CLOSE(fd_pipe[1]);
+	}
 }
 
 static void setup(void)
@@ -201,6 +209,8 @@  static void setup(void)
 	fd_chrdev = SAFE_OPEN(FILE_CHRDEV, O_RDWR, 0600);
 	fd_fifo = SAFE_OPEN(FILE_FIFO, O_RDWR, 0600);
 
+	SAFE_PIPE(fd_pipe);
+
 	SAFE_WRITE(1, fd_src, CONTENT, CONTSIZE);
 	close(fd_src);
 	fd_src = SAFE_OPEN(FILE_SRC_PATH, O_RDONLY, 0664);