Home • About Us • A-Z Index • Search * Contact Us • Register • Login • Press • Shop

The Open Brand -- Problem Reporting and Interpretations System

Problem Report 1579 Details

Help Show help | Quick Search | Submit a Test Suite Support Request | Click here to view your privileges

This page provides all information on Problem Report 1579.

Report 1579 Actions

    Problem Report Number 1579
    Submitter's Classification Specification problem
    State Resolved
    Resolution Permanent Interpretation (PIN)
    Problem Resolution ID PIN.X.0136
    Raised 1995-05-23 08:00
    Updated 2003-03-13 08:00
    Published 1995-06-08 08:00
    Product Standard Internationalised System Calls and Libraries Extended (UNIX 95)
    Certification Program The Open Brand certification program
    Test Suite VSU version 4.0.2
    Test Identification CAPI.os/procprim/execl 9
    Specification System Interfaces and Libraries Issue 4 Version 2
    Location in Spec See Problem Text
    Problem Summary PIN4U.00002 The RLIMIT_AS value needs to be recognized as a runtime semi-invariant value.
    Problem Text
    This issue affects the following tests

    Test Case Test Purposes
    execl 9
    execle 9
    execlp 9
    execv 9
    execve 9
    execvp 9

    This is not precisely a bug in the test suite so much as a defect in
    the standard. The RLIMIT_AS value needs to be recognized as a runtime
    semi-invariant value. While this value can be lowered almost
    arbitrarily it can not, in systems that we are aware of, be raised
    above a certain kernel limit (i.e. when the operating system
    executable image is either constructed or loaded into memory an
    unchangeable maximum is placed upon the maximum process size).
    Test Output
    520|1 1 32408 1 1|PREP: Connect child's pipe to stdout
    520|1 1 32408 1 2|PREP: Construct exec path
    520|1 1 32292 1 3|PREP: Reset RLIMIT_AS to unique values
    520|1 1 32292 1 4|ERROR: setrlimit failed, errno = 22(EINVAL - Invalid argument)
    220|1 1 2 13:48:41|UNRESOLVED

    Review Information

    Review Type TSMA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Recommendation No Resolution Given
    Review Response
    The getrlimit() spec states that a process with appropriate
    privilege can raise its' hard limit. But it does not explicitly
    state which error number should be returned if the call fails.

    The getrlimit text for EPERM states

    [EPERM] The limit specified to setrlimit()
    would have raised the maximum limit
    value, and the calling process does
    not have appropriate privileges.

    The phrase "does not have appropriate privilege" allows different
    behavior of privileged and unprivileged processes in the same
    circumstances. The privileged process is free to set an
    implementation defined error number. The error is mandated for
    the unprivileged process. This may not have been intended.

    We believe this is a grey area in the spec and recommend that a permanent
    interpretation be granted.

    We suggest that this issue needs clarified in a future revision of the spec.

    Review Type SA Review
    Start Date null
    Completed null
    Status Complete
    Review Resolution Permanent Interpretation (PIN)
    Review Conclusion
    A Permanent Interpretation is granted.

    Problem Reporting System Options:

     

    Back   

Contact the Certification Authority