From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,
	RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 27365 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2021 15:45:57 -0000
Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 29 Jun 2021 15:45:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 19618 invoked by uid 550); 29 Jun 2021 15:45:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-ID: <musl.lists.openwall.com>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Received: (qmail 19600 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2021 15:45:54 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=bell-sw-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
        h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent
         :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=rppmLxYWBqBLVLlmf2Jx36hGYB5fVBsSLeKEAwY8H/k=;
        b=uC0rrMFVXBRrUtzFSCbCl6Ew4+YaENmdTDBBRHUebQ1iOzS0uafLXK47gtQzaQRsqu
         6QGZ46FiPWO1wtL7Qp67JDZxu4GOjtF2oHVx0R6VbGYxvcn9HV7ujExmqsHD2Xgo8RAT
         NV2kfJkRcgQn//MPPQeRebQMmyvaXUZRV22Oij8kcB3p0FMh6MfVIx7DU7b2N/KvQEif
         BxPTjY9Or/DOtAVZ4GhexdZDGBiKgzOoDD7MymlRfw2W1a9YiZMu6HkOIl1Ndaa728GX
         Vdo+wxR+FGrzF6kJDND5+RWHVaJf4bBGRJakbaDkBti1yg8Ef8BhEV3tQcFgdwX+nIPy
         vWoA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
        h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date
         :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=rppmLxYWBqBLVLlmf2Jx36hGYB5fVBsSLeKEAwY8H/k=;
        b=lTNMEO2/ECDJVyEXD94t+TigWd2RamYvJSUtFiF9A4IyCmTHA3B9p8Cf1ZNhTGWOKy
         L7P1GQ7ReMatU67AIzd5aJZdrSepqKXcRZ2XM0H63XbM7Hw9YOLY/WJJl3gJfutkww1R
         FmVQtn5ZUADkK9MFOsMAMXU+k/tHLouHBbqYshx8A8iXKyVAW2BKnurLtwzSeJwJUc8v
         TkUwXr77cFchigkiIF4MDlQJ1aqypuwyCJeGk4D3Evb6KfOnmJQMVXa2Uki/QaJYyzmm
         Mduy1Kdb/yApwkLW9Qut5+vpFGmQKm49VoFvsVAojVXGoHIYaoOlISbKGGPK7Li1tY7D
         te4w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531fZU9qvM/ePKuijNciw0bqaAAkDN8qm/GfBU83mzQAMgueXVMt
	cp7KUQxCNijTVKjhU6nT03Gmh3foFrep
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxT4N4sxUYx2ypDn+mpJvAlDZeoNFUhKf+Am/Z7mHT98iJf5356ZclBhJjWE5nIw3ZUwZzjag==
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:504c:: with SMTP id v12mr2532459ljd.7.1624981542833;
        Tue, 29 Jun 2021 08:45:42 -0700 (PDT)
To: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com
References: <20210629133130.143543-1-aleksei.kodanev@bell-sw.com>
 <20210629144834.GP13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
From: Alexey Kodanev <aleksei.kodanev@bell-sw.com>
Message-ID: <0a862f77-4e57-fe2f-d1b3-ea8bcd626aa3@bell-sw.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 18:45:42 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210629144834.GP13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH] nice: return EPERM instead of EACCES

On 29.06.2021 17:48, Rich Felker wrote:
> Is there actually an issue here? setpriority is specified to fail with
> EACCES already for this case; EPERM is only specified for targeting
> other processes you don't have permission to target. Is Linux getting
> this wrong for setpriority?

No, it's fine for setpriority(), it just seems wrong for nice()
to return EACCES in this case.

LTP/nice04 test (setting nice(-10)) is failing with musl and POSIX
indeed says that the errno should be EPERM, for nice().