Hi Cyril, On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:57:50PM +0200, Cyril Hrubis wrote: > > > > In my opinion this is a valid behavior, and the test is just weird; it's > > passing > > in *both* an unaddressable payload and an invalid description, so it's not > > clear > > which case it's meant to be testing. (Generally, if a syscall will fail for > > more than one reason, it's not guaranteed which error code you'll get.) > > That is quite common problem with LTP testcases. Do you care to send a > patch or should I fix that? >
I'll plan to send a patch. Also, it looks like the testing that LTP does of add_key() is very sparse, so I'll try to extend it a bit. > > In any case, once we have a fix merged, it would be nice for there to be an > > ltp > > test added for the "NULL payload with nonzero length" case with one of the > > key > > types that crashed the kernel. > > Here as well, feel free to send a patch or at least point us to a > reproducer that could be turned into a testcase. > I'll plan to send a patch for that as well. Thanks, Eric
