ptrace/ptrace05: preventing kill other processes if fork failed
PATCH 1/1 ptrace/ptrace05: preventing kill other processes if fork failed
If fork failed, we should try next signum. Or the kill(-1, 9) on line 196 will kill a lot of processes.
--- testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c +1 -1
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)switch (child =fork ()) {case -1 :tst_resm (TBROK |TERRNO ,"Failed to fork properly." ); -break ; +continue ;case 0 :if (ptrace (PTRACE_TRACEME ,0 ,NULL ,NULL ) !=-1 ) {
Signature · 1 line
1.9.3
PATCH 1/1 ptrace/ptrace05: preventing kill other processes if fork failed
Hi!
Quoted 13 lines
If fork failed, we should try next signum. Or the
kill(-1, 9)on line 196 will kill a lot of processes.Signed-off-by Han Pingtian <[email protected]>--- testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c +0
-0
testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c int main(int argc, char **argv) · line 102
Quoted 5 lines
testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c +1
-1@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)switch (child =fork ()) {case -1 :tst_resm (TBROK |TERRNO ,"Failed to fork properly." ); -break ; +continue ;
I would just change this to tst_brkm(). There is no point in continuing the test if fork() starts failing.
Signature · 2 lines
Cyril Hrubis [email protected]
PATCH 1/1 ptrace/ptrace05: preventing kill other processes if fork failed
Quoted 9 lines · Cyril Hrubis
Hi!
Quoted 8 lines
If fork failed, we should try next signum. Or the
kill(-1, 9)on line 196 will kill a lot of processes.Signed-off-by Han Pingtian <[email protected]>--- testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Quoted 14 lines
testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c int main(int argc, char **argv) · line 102
Quoted 10 lines
testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c +1
-1@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)switch (child =fork ()) {case -1 :tst_resm (TBROK |TERRNO ,"Failed to fork properly." ); -break ; +continue ;I would just change this to
tst_brkm(). There is no point in continuing the test iffork()starts failing.
Please review the new patch. Thanks.
From ee7ba40a79644a9039d0cc581f78e8708aef8b06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Han Pingtian <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:13:57 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] ptrace/ptrace05: preventing kill other processes if fork
failed
If fork failed, we should try next signum. Or the kill(-1, 9) on line 196 will kill a lot of processes.
--- testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c +2 -2
@@ -98,8 +98,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)switch (child =fork ()) {case -1 : -tst_resm (TBROK |TERRNO ,"Failed to fork properly." ); -break ; +tst_brkm (TBROK |TERRNO ,NULL , +"Failed to fork properly." );case 0 :if (ptrace (PTRACE_TRACEME ,0 ,NULL ,NULL ) !=-1 ) {
Signature · 1 line
1.9.3
PATCH 1/1 ptrace/ptrace05: preventing kill other processes if fork failed
Hi!
Quoted 2 lines
If fork failed, we should try next signum. Or the
kill(-1, 9)on line 196 will kill a lot of processes.
I've shortened the error message a bit and pushed, thanks.
Signature · 2 lines
Cyril Hrubis [email protected]