On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 10:12:47AM +0200, Adrian Reber wrote: > On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 09:49:34AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 07:01:30PM +0100, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote: > > > Hello. > > > > > > This patch set updates clone3 selftest in several aspects: > > > - adding checks for exit_signal invalid values handling; > > > - adding clone3 to selftests targets; > > > - enabling clone3 tests on all architectures; > > > - minor cleanups of the clone3 test. > > > > > > Applied on top of brauer/linux.git/for-next. > > > > So I like this series a lot! Testing is very important. > > And thanks for catching the clone3() exit_signal problem. This way we > > got to release a non-broken kernel. :) > > > > Some notes: I dropped the set_tid extension from the core process > > updates for 5.4 because we ended up in a discussion that made it clear > > we potentially need the ability to restore pids in multiple pid > > namespaces. This means we need some more discussion and the patchset is > > delayed for at least one release. > > Unfortunately, this also means the test that you have based yours upon > > does not exist anymore. However, the tests should not be blocked on > > this. I'd encourage you to talk to Adrian (who is Cced here anyway) and > > come up with a clone3() test suite I can merge. You can very likely do a > > Co-Developed-by so no-ones work gets dropped. :) > > > > Ideally I'd like to see: > > - verifying passing different struct sizes works correctly > > - verify that flag combinations work correctly > > - verify that struct members have correct values etc. pp. > > > > We definitely want the exit_signal test as a regression test so it > > doesn't bite us again! > > > > (Oh, please also add tool/test/selftests/clone3/ to the pidfd/core > > process MAINTAINERS entry.) > > Eugene and I have already discussed this. We will resubmit the clone3() > selftests in the next few days with all our changes combined. Excellent! Very happy to hear this! :) Christian
