Received: by 2002:a25:8b12:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i18csp1339826ybl; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:06:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxPmxuA8cqK1ovaD19ay6xF7h5fcdcb5BJyZO6d35Luj///R22j24+/hZi95szhbRScAVyH X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8e10:: with SMTP id c16mr8223847pfr.124.1566608763660; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:06:03 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1566608763; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ujvHxXt6Qr6dOtaPGxs/DfRSqwvXrT6IJtxognxDpltT3tTSIrkIROQGj5c4hh7UlI jUW1T7xFyN3eOI3/XHUbQjIGOv9ye4DNj+ZvRnGq5e5ZDI7G6pTiHHgkm1sW9bJ1FOOc PoTmRaSiM6DEwitSmfdxche6E2yA4T6sV5RHeTO0Ta0uMfWZgf9zTMAfLkWIU9m8sKl5 SKmGItGp0FbjgjH27I/4Xrxvw3F6IXrFMiInIJmiyzBAV/YphAZDtBnB95lQoXRxiHIT QvKFL4+gM82WlQzsocZ/SWS0rTGm6crTMlzjrq4ErhZ+2J5kSSMzYRKAxK/gl9THAkQD T0Ow== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=gO3LZsXjDlrVljuF9pShs5ZK+ZVOT1ian+diPFOlUwA=; b=TIqdSCB9gCb8+NEIn7f5q8o22kS1yVEtkkGt6YKjC4UbOJXUQoo8ZlmZi+WGxT6804 1L3eEO+idYaudBTsDyRwt7NCa+VWba9g9ja9wb4Izr/ORSc1rIQeJOW8ems+tUoSjGfp lTfKCU5uABbshQFRrNpQZ9c6jwVSTlS7b1YI009fkc5M5nKjMyeCz82Jw0kgYS66R8nm iZcGd7Q1ZgLiYEdFwmRyOavJ6heAEnltgAECTqtgno5Nm/HbW+/1wn112RzesN7w8uIv er6ry4EVR55TI8G4Y5rWT3a5dxtKjObXEfY6HSMIoN3rAY86yWN+8V+t0xb3lxTayeKH mGdg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b="NZHvEK/V"; 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=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j12si3247478pgp.261.2019.08.23.18.05.48; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:06:03 -0700 (PDT) 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=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b="NZHvEK/V"; 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=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726634AbfHXBFA (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 23 Aug 2019 21:05:00 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f65.google.com ([209.85.221.65]:38180 "EHLO mail-wr1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725782AbfHXBFA (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Aug 2019 21:05:00 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f65.google.com with SMTP id g17so10128586wrr.5; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:04:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gO3LZsXjDlrVljuF9pShs5ZK+ZVOT1ian+diPFOlUwA=; b=NZHvEK/V3VkNVqCIhrt20Lp0WSO1CreVQJZ66aCZCkcyIB8z4QKnjAs/psGK4aK7Rr CQ1upJMbOYnl0VFSIZxTgQ4dT4ZN/JwOG1juhr/MY7HGgZi56OVPJ++4nNZfelAQDand 6IJvdE/PDPxqHcOUv0xinNwmBuytwU+ZALDOaanc+5FFIfPOHCm0PRT9PMR4hJxCbN+w hkrH5QjyjawjNbpMdj/d+Uh7sZfoCRdhmx0TukKHL1A+jksI6dy+elWrJoKnaGNSichm PN5eT6btNihSlj3aJOlxMZHxRGIphTtMup50MaI0l6okUd1fieScQEi9gcG8ce53louc /26Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gO3LZsXjDlrVljuF9pShs5ZK+ZVOT1ian+diPFOlUwA=; b=jnaHXRQqGDMh5JQj6gQKLjOuhYsV4F0vkV1QXFD4O1Xg3jjPxyPMA4y8mwEw15QcMZ 3wyTP1awRZagSq7lBOyYBFDTfhU9kBzUB8Mag9e9/9Z47B78VWKRx7++R5onuMf7qNDI aS1hG/9KxnMmE56Ijgbt/i5nZ+hRhnXvj0oWmXGz2jnP6ER6AO2l0MY3ceu1e2JjR+xg A3JJ0FE5DzriTSvuzr3eJR0igNlOVBncId/3lsURpNfZtLAEOHQPLXBsWdlyPEsJ8rMq qlYMusS3l+rQ5DrWqL3RyUPAh0zLmTJ/onpAKQPAqoVEAg/9CgvlcHUv5IZlCb7UwsXn HW9w== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU/WfwBp8UORN8mAkTsxOdp+SEs6Cmw0vpOEi664QjJUHWlcGQ9 wM/5V088qPJFsdtOvQIaTkX0N0rTzrvjQDGciiI= X-Received: by 2002:adf:f2c1:: with SMTP id d1mr8183863wrp.157.1566608697250; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:04:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190822205533.4877-1-david.abdurachmanov@sifive.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Abdurachmanov Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:04:21 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] riscv: add support for SECCOMP and SECCOMP_FILTER To: Paul Walmsley Cc: Tycho Andersen , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Oleg Nesterov , Kees Cook , Andy Lutomirski , Will Drewry , Shuah Khan , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , David Abdurachmanov , Thomas Gleixner , Allison Randal , Alexios Zavras , Anup Patel , Vincent Chen , Alan Kao , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, me@carlosedp.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 5:30 PM Paul Walmsley wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2019, David Abdurachmanov wrote: > > > There is one failing kernel selftest: global.user_notification_signal > > Is this the only failing test? Or are the rest of the selftests skipped > when this test fails, and no further tests are run, as seems to be shown > here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/CADnnUqcmDMRe1f+3jG8SPR6jRrnBsY8VVD70VbKEm0NqYeoicA@mail.gmail.com/ Yes, it's a single test failing. After removing global.user_notification_signal test everything else pass and you get the results printed. > > For example, looking at the source, I'd naively expect to see the > user_notification_closed_listener test result -- which follows right > after the failing test in the selftest source. But there aren't any > results? Yes, it hangs at this point. You have to manually terminate it. > > Also - could you follow up with the author of this failing test to see if > we can get some more clarity about what might be going wrong here? It > appears that the failing test was added in commit 6a21cc50f0c7f ("seccomp: > add a return code to trap to userspace") by Tycho Andersen > . Well the code states ".. and hope that it doesn't break when there is actually a signal :)". Maybe we are just unlucky. I don't have results from other architectures to compare. I found that Linaro is running selftests, but SECCOMP is disabled and thus it's failing. Is there another CI which tracks selftests? https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-next-oe/tests/kselftest/seccomp_seccomp_bpf?top=next-20190823 > > > - Paul