Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-103007-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Message-ID: <0459b58d-972e-42cf-8516-befc39fbe97c@collabora.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:49:50 +0500
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cc: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>,
 Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
 Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
 "kernel@collabora.com" <kernel@collabora.com>
Subject: Re: [Test Failure Report] exec: Test failures in execveat
Content-Language: en-US
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
References: <02c8bf8e-1934-44ab-a886-e065b37366a7@collabora.com>
 <202403051256.7A50FE28E7@keescook>
 <fd210d04-cc98-4e29-a051-bdb7e1367494@collabora.com>
 <202403071238.AC7BD90@keescook>
 <cf98ff2f-66a8-4800-855f-5c03c952b514@collabora.com>
 <202403132004.84C9C50A5@keescook>
From: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>
In-Reply-To: <202403132004.84C9C50A5@keescook>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 3/14/24 8:05 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 10:08:36PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>> On 3/8/24 1:39 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 02:22:27PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>>>> I've tested this patch. Still getting same failures.
>>>
>>> Okay, thanks for testing!
>>>
>>> What environment are you testing under? It would seem like some unexpected
>>> userspace conditions exist that the test isn't prepared for. (I was able
>>> to reproduce one error with /bin/dash, for example, but not the others,
>>> so something must be different in the set up.)
>> I'm testing on Debian Bookworm with v6.1, v6.7 and next-20240304 kernels.
>> I've tested it on another VM which is also Debian Bookworm. The default
>> shell is dash on Debian as well.
> 
> Do you know which kernel version this _passes_ on? I haven't been able
> to find when this actually returned the expected values...
I'd tried to find a kernel on which it used to pass i.e., I rewinded the
kernel to the last change in this test. But still it was failing on that.
Not sure if the test is wrong or the environment is making the test to
output wrong values.

> 

-- 
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum