Re: [yocto-patches] [pseudo] [PATCH 2/2] tests: Add close_range() test

Paul Barker <[email protected]> Wed, 15 Jul 2026 21:03:17 +0100

Newsgroups	org.yoctoproject.lists.yocto-patches
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On Wed, 2026-07-15 at 05:41 +0000, Baban via lists.yoctoproject.org
wrote:
> Covers the ENOSYS regression itself, that the wrapper agrees with the
> kernel about bad arguments, and the part that actually needs the care:
> pseudo keeps its own descriptors in the range, including the connection
> to its server, and has to come out of a close_range(3, ~0U, 0) still
> tracking ownership.
> 
> close_range() needs a 5.9 kernel, so the shell wrapper probes for it
> with PSEUDO_DISABLED=1 before running anything. Asking with pseudo out
> of the way keeps a wrapper which has gone back to returning ENOSYS from
> passing itself off as an old kernel and quietly skipping the test it is
> supposed to fail.
> 
> [YOCTO #16339]
> 
> AI-Generated: Uses Claude (claude-opus-4-8)
> Signed-off-by: Babanpreet Singh <[email protected]>

Hi,

Thanks for including a test case! I have a couple of bits of feedback.

The close_range() syscall was added in Linux 5.9, the
CLOSE_RANGE_CLOEXEC flag was added in Linux 5.11. So on Linux 5.9/5.10,
the probe will succeed but the test will fail.

There is also no test coverage for CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARED.

Otherwise this looks pretty good, please send a v2.

Best regards,

-- 
Paul Barker

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 252 B)