unofficial mirror of libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.ibm.com>
To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
	"Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com>,
	Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add UNSUPPORTED check in elf/tst-pldd.
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 09:05:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <32638e2c-6a0e-4712-7521-93a160b13e1c@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5908e34b-25bc-0b8f-3100-1e5ee663f380@linaro.org>

On 9/10/19 3:32 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/09/2019 05:46, Stefan Liebler wrote:
>> On 9/6/19 5:21 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>> On 9/3/19 9:34 AM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>>>> Yes, my initial suggestion was just to make it as UNSUPPORTED for
>>>> ptrace_scope >= 1. But I do not oppose adjusting it to run on
>>>> ptrace_scope 1, it is just that the required hackery lead to make it
>>>> somewhat as complex than the test itself.
>>>
>>> The flip side of the coin is that the more "UNSUPPORTED" results we
>>> add *implies* there is "one valid way" to setup a glibc test run
>>> and we don't clearly document how to turn all the "UNSUPPORTED"
>>> entries into supported tests?
>>>
>>> Stefan's code can at least be refactored into support/ if we need
>>> to do the same thing again in another test.
>>>
>>
>> PING.
>>
>> As I have already posted multiple versions of the patch, how to proceed?
>> 1) UNSUPPORTED if support_ptrace_scope() >= 2;
>> Support support_ptrace_scope() == 1
>> by adjusting the process tree;
>> (see https://www.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-09/msg00024.html)
>>
>> 2) UNSUPPORTED if support_ptrace_scope() >= 2;
>> Support support_ptrace_scope() == 1
>> by calling support_ptrace_process_set_ptracer_any();
>> (see https://www.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-08/msg00722.html)
>>
>> 3) UNSUPPORTED if support_ptrace_scope() != 0
>> (patch would use support_ptrace_scope() of one of the patches above in order to trigger FAIL_UNSUPPORTED)
> 
> My view is although 2) is way complex that I would like, I think it should
> the more complete solution. Does still need review or is it ready to land?
> 
You've already reviewed the support part on a previous version of "patch 
2)" (the support part was not changed in the latest version; see 
https://www.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-08/msg00703.html).

But it needs review for the synchronization part between the 
target_process and do_test in tst-pldd.c.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-11  7:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-27 10:19 [PATCH] Add UNSUPPORTED check in elf/tst-pldd Stefan Liebler
2019-08-27 15:06 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-08-27 15:14   ` Florian Weimer
2019-08-27 19:11     ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-08-28  9:06       ` Stefan Liebler
2019-08-28  9:24         ` Florian Weimer
2019-08-28 14:42           ` Stefan Liebler
2019-08-29  8:47             ` Florian Weimer
2019-09-02 15:28               ` Stefan Liebler
2019-09-17 13:31                 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-09-17 15:17                   ` Stefan Liebler
2019-09-18 10:45                     ` Stefan Liebler
2019-09-18 15:17                       ` Joseph Myers
2019-09-19 10:28                         ` Stefan Liebler
2019-09-02 19:37               ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-09-03  6:30                 ` Stefan Liebler
2019-09-03 13:34                   ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-09-06  3:21                     ` Carlos O'Donell
2019-09-10  8:46                       ` Stefan Liebler
2019-09-10 13:32                         ` Adhemerval Zanella
2019-09-11  7:05                           ` Stefan Liebler [this message]
2019-08-28 12:19         ` Adhemerval Zanella

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/involved.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=32638e2c-6a0e-4712-7521-93a160b13e1c@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=stli@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
    --cc=carlos@redhat.com \
    --cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).