Hi On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Pranith Kumar <bobby.pr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Geert, > > On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven > <ge...@linux-m68k.org> wrote: >> Hi Pranith, >> >> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar <bobby.pr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not >>> wired >>> because of which we get a warning while compilation. >>> >>> So I wired them up in this patch. What else needs to be done? I tried the >>> memfd_test after compiling this kernel, but it is failing. What am I >>> missing for >>> this to work? Any advice is really appreciated! :) >> >> Did it fail due to the (silly) "ifeq ($(ARCH),X86)" checks in >> tools/testing/selftests/memfd/Makefile? >> > > I removed that check and compiled memfd_test.c by hand. This is the > following error which I get when I run the test: > > $ ./memfd_test > memfd: CREATE > memfd: BASIC > 10 != 0 = GET_SEALS(3) > Aborted > > This is basically when checking the seals which we already added. It > should return 10 (F_SEAL_SHRINK | F_SEAL_WRITE), instead it is returning 0. > > What else needs to be done for this to properly work? I see that for > m68k, you just wired it up like in this patch. Did it work after that?
The only arch-dependent code for memfd_test.c is the syscall invocation: memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags); via glibc as: syscall(__NR_memfd_create, name, flags); Can you debug your test-run (maybe via simple printk() in mm/shmem.c memfd_create()) and see what's going wrong there? Thanks David _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev