On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 05:30:53PM -0700, 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+3jg8spr6jrrnbsy8vvd70vbkem0nqyeo...@mail.gmail.com/
>
> 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?
>
> 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
> <ty...@tycho.ws>.
So, the original email says the riscv series is tested on top of 5.2-rc7,
but just for fun, can you confirm that you're building a tree that includes
9dd3fcb0ab73 ("selftests/seccomp: Handle namespace failures gracefully")? I
assume it does, but I suspect something similar is happening, where the
environment is slightly different than expected and the test stalls.
Does it behave the same way under emulation (i.e. can I hope to
reproduce this myself?)
--
Kees Cook
