Connector/proc_filter test fixes

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 <[email protected]>

Link https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA*[email protected]/__;Kw!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!LJI4riV83FdITmzoXmCfxlHKGSeevxg-wn6_ISa7txpETYWPxbtVkAtxSg6IZGi3k5oh2BKMyrbn9464kchHYnuqPEaU$

Signed-off-by Shuah Khan <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile | 2 +-

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/Makefile +1 -1

index 21c9f3a973a0..92188b9bac5c 100644
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
-CFLAGS += -Wall
+CFLAGS += -Wall $(KHDR_INCLUDES)
 

TEST_GEN_PROGS = proc_filter

Signature · 1 line

2.39.2

Add gitignore and poupulate it with test name - proc_filter

Signed-off-by Shuah Khan <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore | 1 +

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore

tools/testing/selftests/connector/.gitignore new file +1 -0

new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..c90098199a44
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+proc_filter

Signature · 1 line

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +1 -1

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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");

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +0 -0

 	if (filter) {
 		input.event_type = PROC_EVENT_NONZERO_EXIT;
 		input.mcast_op = PROC_CN_MCAST_LISTEN;

Signature · 1 line

2.39.2

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 		}
 	}
 

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+	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.

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
         }
     }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+    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.

Quoted 44 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 43 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 30 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +1 -1

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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");

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 10 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +6 -1

-  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.

Quoted 2 lines

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

Quoted 52 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 46 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 }
 }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+  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.

Quoted 5 lines

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.

Quoted 50 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 50 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 46 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 }
 }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+ 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.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

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

Quoted 66 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 50 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 50 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 46 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 }
 }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+ 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.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

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.

Quoted 4 lines

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.

Quoted 68 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 68 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 50 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 50 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 46 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 }
 }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+ 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.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

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.

Quoted 1 line

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

Quoted 73 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 68 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 68 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 50 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 50 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 46 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 }
 }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+ 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.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

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.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

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)

Quoted 73 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 73 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 69 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 61 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 50 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 50 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 46 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 }
 }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+ 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.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

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.

Quoted 7 lines

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.

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 4 lines

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

Quoted 78 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 73 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 73 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 69 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 61 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 50 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 50 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 46 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 }
 }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+ 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.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

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.

Quoted 7 lines

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.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 4 lines

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.

Quoted 1 line

Quoted 4 lines

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.

Quoted 92 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 76 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 73 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 73 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 69 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 61 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 50 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 50 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 46 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 }
 }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+ 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.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

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.

Quoted 7 lines

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.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 4 lines

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.

Quoted 5 lines

Can you please look at the usage for this test:

- What should happen when kernel without filtering is run as root or non-root

Quoted 1 line

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

Quoted 88 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 76 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 73 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 73 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 69 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 61 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 50 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 50 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 46 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 35 lines · Anjali Kulkarni

Quoted 35 lines · Shuah Khan

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 <[email protected]>

---
tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c | 9 +++++++--

1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +2 -2

index 4fe8c6763fd8..7b2081b98e5c 100644
@@ -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);
 }
 }
 

Quoted 8 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c int main(int argc, char *argv[]) · line 267

Quoted 5 lines

tools/testing/selftests/connector/proc_filter.c +5 -0

+ 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.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

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.

Quoted 7 lines

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.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 4 lines

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.

Quoted 1 line

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 4 lines

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