Re: [DTrace-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] test: correct file permissions

On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 08:20:10PM -0500, Eugene Loh wrote:
> On 1/6/26 00:54, Kris Van Hees wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 11:50:53PM -0500, Eugene Loh wrote:
> > > The patch otherwise reads right to me.  The tests, however, are not happy.
> > > The following tests fail intermittently:
> > > 
> > >      test/demo/script/interp.d
> > >      test/demo/script/tracewrite.d
> > >      test/unittest/lockstat/tst.lockstat-summary.d
> > >      test/unittest/scripting/tst.arg0.d
> > >      test/unittest/scripting/tst.basic.d
> > >      test/unittest/scripting/tst.trace.d
> > > 
> > > These tests fail consistently:
> > >      test/unittest/scripting/tst.assign.d
> > >      test/unittest/scripting/tst.pgid.d
> > >      test/unittest/scripting/tst.pid.d
> > > The problem for these tests is
> > >      -#!/usr/sbin/dtrace -qs
> > >      +#!dtrace -qs
> > > Since these files used to be invoked as scripts, the -q was ignored.  The .r
> > > files relied on that.  So the interpreter files should drop the -q.  That
> > > does not fix them entirely;  it simply makes their failures intermittent.
> > Yes, I caught (I think) all of the opposite cases where I added a pragma to
> > ensure that the -q behaviour was retained, but I don't think I considered the
> > case where the script was not invoked using the #! and that therefore the -q
> > was not actually effective.
> > 
> > > I'll look more at the intermittent failures, but there may be more than one
> > > thing going on there.  (lockstat-summary looks different)
> > Thanks.
> 
> The intermittent failures were weird, but that lockstat-summary.d should
> also fail is just plain insane.  The problem actually appears to be with a
> different patch.  So, I'm withdrawing the "intermittent failure" complaint
> about this patch, which should be ready for a final version.  Elsewhere,
> I'll report on what's really going on.

Yes, I believe it is due to:
	[3/4] bpf: allocate the buffers BPF map to fit highest CPU id

I must have introduced a bug in that patch.