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=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 28525 invoked from network); 8 Mar 2022 22:16:25 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 8 Mar 2022 22:16:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 27923 invoked by uid 550); 8 Mar 2022 22:16:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 27876 invoked from network); 8 Mar 2022 22:16:21 -0000 Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 17:16:08 -0500 From: Rich Felker To: Alexey Kodanev Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: <20220308221607.GR7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20210629133130.143543-1-aleksei.kodanev@bell-sw.com> <20210629144834.GP13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <0a862f77-4e57-fe2f-d1b3-ea8bcd626aa3@bell-sw.com> <20210629201014.GQ13220@brightrain.aerifal.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH] nice: return EPERM instead of EACCES On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 12:18:15PM +0300, Alexey Kodanev wrote: > On 29.06.2021 23:10, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 06:45:42PM +0300, Alexey Kodanev wrote: > >> 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(). > > > > Oh, sorry, I read it backwards and was thinking it was replacing EPERM > > with EACCES. Indeed nice is supposed to return EPERM where setpriority > > would return EACCES so I think this patch is correct. > > > > Hi Rich, > > I wonder what is the status of this patch, didn't find it in git... is > there any issue with it? Sorry I overlooked this for so long! I'm merging it now. Rich