On 2023-07-14 00:00:51+1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> On 2023-07-13, Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
> > > > index 486334981e60..08f0969208eb 100644
> > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
> > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
> > > > @@ -580,6 +580,10 @@ int run_syscall(int min, int max)
> > > > CASE_TEST(chmod_net); EXPECT_SYSZR(proc, chmod("/proc/self/net", 0555)); break;
> > > > CASE_TEST(chmod_self); EXPECT_SYSER(proc, chmod("/proc/self", 0555), -1, EPERM); break;
> > > > CASE_TEST(chown_self); EXPECT_SYSER(proc, chown("/proc/self", 0, 0), -1, EPERM); break;
> > > > + CASE_TEST(chmod_self_comm); EXPECT_SYSER(proc, chmod("/proc/self/comm", 0777), -1, EPERM); break;
> > > > + CASE_TEST(chmod_tid_comm); EXPECT_SYSER(proc, chmod("/proc/thread-self/comm", 0777), -1, EPERM); break;
> > > > + CASE_TEST(chmod_self_environ);EXPECT_SYSER(proc, chmod("/proc/self/environ", 0777), -1, EPERM); break;
> > > > + CASE_TEST(chmod_tid_environ); EXPECT_SYSER(proc, chmod("/proc/thread-self/environ", 0777), -1, EPERM); break;
> >
> > >
> > > I'm not a big fan of this, it abuses the nolibc testsuite to test core
> > > kernel functionality.
> >
> > Yes, this should be dropped.
> > We need a minimal patch to fix this. This just makes backporting harder
> > and any test doesn't need to be backported.
>
> Alright, I'll drop it in v2 (though I'm not sure why there are tests for
> /proc/self and /proc/self/net then).
To test the functionality of the implementations of chown() and chmod()
in nolibc. procfs is used used as a test fixture to provide diverse file
and directories that are (nearly) always available.
The system under test is nolibc, not the kernel itself.
Thomas
