Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp7503712wrg; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 06:37:38 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvXK+73N4kQa9cRFNezNKMOeLulgTiQnsPIjd7LOVnJqFhaSbaQrcBhjnU87KGmfMA1UZ8E X-Received: by 10.101.78.143 with SMTP id b15mr1730111pgs.229.1519915058662; Thu, 01 Mar 2018 06:37:38 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1519915058; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Ykv5iV7PQmqfJ1HfmAFlVFdXtXXI6ESniKvF0awZxm03AhXEk9FK5JdVYeRgdiiMwl UEnXa6KabSF/hMl3ZcLJqqqd3bV+RYnD3ChgN8h2jY/BRuAWvKaPVgUMP6f0wIafIeO8 /Nuio+RshD3GynGns4EERTAQJYyGorptG0gGfPAXx07Iu2i2fDu162MT7Ce2ch12X2JU 4mFI8Bd5TPhoHESutXLIHsZvrGCU6AOjCHbNx2m5DWnJlPZM15mUeTqv3nzvXeKmAKxF 3vLtfnIGL23pp2yW3ggXf0LCoi0rpo6sJKWopunra3HHKQ7nJTwa88+CcwiuRj3k+NSA HT4Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id :dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=J1aKEilhjePfiLrhf4mfWkvxiZ26UfKOhFOk9bqWfX8=; b=qLtMiicOtJXmwDJVpK55ZlG07jJVh3B6Ba2dZo0GLEk9WH5Li/ZJ1j/zThFNYtKdp6 mquZUo53MWDJ7kL1guekf67zycfvWlLQa40gcjPqhCo/cb712GZyx1oKP1n4Gh/yLyHM Oa4n12jN4RlYZ9H2srBfQCPReAaVq4PAu32yjg8zFOjgZ34YwZ+tzf7TIFKYdyXd1CS4 Xu/Mha8epqe7KTvCDz2A5/Bory1VJBg7rA70Pme0EGk/kGzTCoFFmStZciXGH0pxP02b nSKh2ji6AWg+LxtxYtbC8oLrEfHwdTy5Z4291eNDi6flu0qGbuZivJhSH4238RQXO4Xs L1pA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@btinternet.com header.s=btcpcloud header.b=DTEKVugO; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=QUARANTINE sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=btinternet.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b1si2529702pgn.191.2018.03.01.06.37.22; Thu, 01 Mar 2018 06:37:38 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@btinternet.com header.s=btcpcloud header.b=DTEKVugO; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=QUARANTINE sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=btinternet.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1031350AbeCAOgm (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 1 Mar 2018 09:36:42 -0500 Received: from rgout0403.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk ([65.20.0.216]:31077 "EHLO rgout04.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031055AbeCAOgk (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Mar 2018 09:36:40 -0500 X-OWM-Source-IP: 86.134.53.209 (GB) X-OWM-Env-Sender: richard_c_haines@btinternet.com X-RazorGate-Vade-Classification: clean X-RazorGate-Vade-Verdict: clean 0 X-VadeSecure-score: verdict=clean score=0/300, class=clean X-SNCR-VADESECURE: CLEAN X-RazorGate-Vade: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtfedrieejgdeijecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemuceutffkvffkuffjvffgnffgvefqofdpqfgfvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepkffuhffvffgjfhgtofgggfesthejredtredtjeenucfhrhhomheptfhitghhrghrugcujfgrihhnvghsuceorhhitghhrghruggptggphhgrihhnvghssegsthhinhhtvghrnhgvthdrtghomheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucfkphepkeeirddufeegrdehfedrvddtleenucfrrghrrghmpehhvghloheplhhotggrlhhhohhsthdrlhhotggrlhguohhmrghinhdpihhnvghtpeek Received: from localhost.localdomain (86.134.53.209) by rgout04.bt.lon5.cpcloud.co.uk (9.0.019.21-1) (authenticated as richard_c_haines@btinternet.com) id 5A91AFE400709B02; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 14:36:30 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=btcpcloud; t=1519915000; bh=J1aKEilhjePfiLrhf4mfWkvxiZ26UfKOhFOk9bqWfX8=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:X-Mailer:Mime-Version; b=DTEKVugOwmQIN0sAM8Vt629WwWmUizvpKc4FK9kHaGUROf0jIGAgj7M48i/KAe9kONVlHJ3IroQYRIbqmuOgtFw50y0SlFpumGykH987ZdvIDghWIDjxB3REnXr4MSABHbPK5aFZ3wU5ULWKjg1Xr8CjuXUViyKs0tK3IfT55qU= Message-ID: <1519914989.3063.1.camel@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: Regression found when running LTP connect01 on next-20180301 From: Richard Haines To: Paul Moore , Anders Roxell Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 14:36:29 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: <20180301083316.GA6779@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.5 (3.26.5-1.fc27) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2018-03-01 at 08:42 -0500, Paul Moore wrote: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 3:33 AM, Anders Roxell rg> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I was running LTP's testcase connect01 [1] and found a regression > > in linux-next > > (next-20180301). Bisect gave me this patch as the problematic > > patch (sha > > d452930fd3b9 "selinux: Add SCTP support") on a x86 target. > > > > Output from the test(LTP release 20180118): > > $ cd /opt/ltp/ > > $ cat runtest/syscalls |grep connect01>runtest/connect-syscall > > $ ./runltp -pq -f connect-syscall > > " > > Running tests....... > > connect01 1 TPASS : bad file descriptor successful > > connect01 2 TPASS : invalid socket buffer successful > > connect01 3 TPASS : invalid salen successful > > connect01 4 TPASS : invalid socket successful > > connect01 5 TPASS : already connected successful > > connect01 6 TPASS : connection refused successful > > connect01 7 TFAIL : connect01.c:146: invalid address family ; > > returned -1 (expected -1), errno 22 (expected 97) > > INFO: ltp-pan reported some tests FAIL > > LTP Version: 20180118 > > " > > > > The output from the test expected 97 and we received 22, can you > > please > > elaborate on what have been changed? > > > > Cheers, > > Anders > > [1] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/blob/20180118/testcas > > es/kernel/syscalls/connect/connect01.c#L146 > > Hi Anders, > > Thanks for the report. Out of curiosity, we're you running the full > LTP test suite and this was the only failure, or did you just run the > connect01 test? Either answer is fine, I'm just trying to understand > the scope of the regression. > > Richard, are you able to look into this? If not, let me know and > I'll > dig a bit deeper (I'll likely take a quick look today, but if the > failure is subtle it might require some digging). I'll have a look today. >