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;
Date:   Mon, 16 Sep 2019 10:12:47 +0200
From:   Adrian Reber <areber@redhat.com>
To:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Cc:     Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Update clone3 self-tests
Message-ID: <20190916081247.GC26734@dcbz.redhat.com>
References: <cover.1568138393.git.esyr@redhat.com>
 <20190916074933.j33qc2z3hynpj2gf@wittgenstein>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190916074933.j33qc2z3hynpj2gf@wittgenstein>
Organization: Red Hat
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 09:49:34AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 07:01:30PM +0100, Eugene Syromiatnikov wrote:
> > Hello.
> > 
> > This patch set updates clone3 selftest in several aspects:
> >  - adding checks for exit_signal invalid values handling;
> >  - adding clone3 to selftests targets;
> >  - enabling clone3 tests on all architectures;
> >  - minor cleanups of the clone3 test.
> > 
> > Applied on top of brauer/linux.git/for-next.
> 
> So I like this series a lot! Testing is very important.
> And thanks for catching the clone3() exit_signal problem. This way we
> got to release a non-broken kernel. :)
> 
> Some notes: I dropped the set_tid extension from the core process
> updates for 5.4 because we ended up in a discussion that made it clear
> we potentially need the ability to restore pids in multiple pid
> namespaces. This means we need some more discussion and the patchset is
> delayed for at least one release.
> Unfortunately, this also means the test that you have based yours upon
> does not exist anymore. However, the tests should not be blocked on
> this. I'd encourage you to talk to Adrian (who is Cced here anyway) and
> come up with a clone3() test suite I can merge. You can very likely do a
> Co-Developed-by so no-ones work gets dropped. :)
> 
> Ideally I'd like to see:
> - verifying passing different struct sizes works correctly
> - verify that flag combinations work correctly
> - verify that struct members have correct values etc. pp.
> 
> We definitely want the exit_signal test as a regression test so it
> doesn't bite us again!
> 
> (Oh, please also add tool/test/selftests/clone3/ to the pidfd/core
>  process MAINTAINERS entry.)

Eugene and I have already discussed this. We will resubmit the clone3()
selftests in the next few days with all our changes combined.

		Adrian