[PATCHv3] tst-pidfd.c: UNSUPPORTED if we get EPERM on pidfd_open or pidfd_getfd

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 7/4/22 22:39, Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha wrote:
> No, in glibc we assume that if the syscall is not implemented by the kernel
> is should return ENOSYS, not EPERM.  If kernel is doing otherwise it is
> returning bogus values and we moved away to either try to emulate fallbacks
> it or handle it (just check the issues we had with clone3).
> 
> Sorry, but you really need to sort this out on your syscall filtering
> mechanism. 

I agree with Adhemerval.

The glibc testsuite will only mark tests as unsupported when the underlying
system is correctly configured. An incorrectly configured system should result
in the tests being marked as failed to indicate that incorrect configuration.

Running the glibc testsuite requires a configuration where the kernel returns
ENOSYS. If you have a custom LSM module that returns ENOPERM, then that is an
error because such a module should return ENOSYS.

Given we have two developers disagreeing on v3's direction I'm marking this
as rejected in patchwork.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.