Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

BUG: only use bogus syscall numbers in test 29 #436

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

BUG: only use bogus syscall numbers in test 29 #436

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

pcmoore
Copy link
Member

@pcmoore pcmoore commented Sep 5, 2024

The goal of test 29 is to test bogus negative syscall numbers, unfortunately it appears our choice of syscalls was not bogus on all the architectures we support. This commit fixes that by picking a syscall number well outside the pseudo-syscall/PNR range and removing the sysmips(2) syscall from the test so as to not cause problems at a later date.

@pcmoore
tests: only use bogus syscall numbers in test 29
a76ff17 
The goal of test 29 is to test bogus negative syscall numbers,
unfortunately it appears our choice of syscalls was not bogus on all
the architectures we support.  This commit fixes that by picking a
syscall number well outside the pseudo-syscall/PNR range and removing
the sysmips(2) syscall from the test so as to not cause problems
at a later date.

Signed-off-by: Paul Moore <[email protected]>
@pcmoore pcmoore added this to the v2.6.0 milestone Sep 5, 2024
@pcmoore
Copy link
Member Author

pcmoore commented Sep 5, 2024

Test results:

% uname -m
aarch64
% ./regression -b 29-sim-pseudo_syscall
=============== Thu Sep  5 05:40:40 PM EDT 2024 ===============
Regression Test Report ("regression -b 29-sim-pseudo_syscall")
 batch name: 29-sim-pseudo_syscall
 test mode:  c
 test type:  bpf-sim
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00001 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00002 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00003 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00004 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00005 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00006 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00007 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00008 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00009 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00010 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00011 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%002-00001 result:   SUCCESS
 test mode:  c
 test type:  bpf-valgrind
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%003-00001 result:   SUCCESS
 batch name: 29-sim-pseudo_syscall
 test mode:  python
 test type:  bpf-sim
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00001 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00002 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00003 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00004 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00005 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00006 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00007 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00008 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00009 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00010 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00011 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%002-00001 result:   SUCCESS
 test mode:  python
 test type:  bpf-valgrind
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%003-00001 result:   SKIPPED (only valid in native/c mode)
Regression Test Summary
 tests run: 25
 tests skipped: 1
 tests passed: 25
 tests failed: 0
 tests errored: 0
============================================================

% uname -m
x86_64
% ./regression -b 29-sim-pseudo_syscall
=============== Thu Sep  5 05:41:59 PM EDT 2024 ===============
Regression Test Report ("regression -b 29-sim-pseudo_syscall")
 batch name: 29-sim-pseudo_syscall
 test mode:  c
 test type:  bpf-sim
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00001 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00002 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00003 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00004 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00005 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00006 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00007 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00008 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00009 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00010 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00011 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%002-00001 result:   SUCCESS
 test mode:  c
 test type:  bpf-valgrind
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%003-00001 result:   SUCCESS
 batch name: 29-sim-pseudo_syscall
 test mode:  python
 test type:  bpf-sim
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00001 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00002 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00003 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00004 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00005 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00006 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00007 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00008 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00009 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00010 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%001-00011 result:   SUCCESS
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%002-00001 result:   SUCCESS
 test mode:  python
 test type:  bpf-valgrind
Test 29-sim-pseudo_syscall%%003-00001 result:   SKIPPED (only valid in native/c mode)
Regression Test Summary
 tests run: 25
 tests skipped: 1
 tests passed: 25
 tests failed: 0
 tests errored: 0
============================================================

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

coverage: 89.454%. remained the same
when pulling a76ff17 on pcmoore:gh-418
into 2847f10 on seccomp:main.

@pcmoore pcmoore linked an issue Sep 5, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
BUG: test 29 is broken on aarch64 #418
Closed
@drakenclimber
Copy link
Member

Pushed to main in commit 87876aa. I didn't push it to release-2.5 since we're targeting this fix for 2.6.0.

Thanks, @pcmoore

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@drakenclimber drakenclimber drakenclimber approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bug pending/review
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v2.6.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

BUG: test 29 is broken on aarch64
3 participants
@pcmoore @coveralls @drakenclimber