[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <af21ec84-56a1-c25a-3672-06a48d3e9916@bell-sw.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 12:18:15 +0300
From: Alexey Kodanev <aleksei.kodanev@...l-sw.com>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nice: return EPERM instead of EACCES
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?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
