Bug 509642

To test this I've used:

TESTS="$(find . -type f -perm -u+x \( -name 'stime0*' -or -name 'setns0*' -or -name 'semop0*' -or -name 'semctl0*' -or -name 'shmctl0*' -or -name 'msgctl0*' -or -name 'sigpending0*' -or -name 'settimeofday0*' \) -exec basename '{}' ';')" make -j$(nproc) ltpchecks

This gives the following test results (when running under root):




el9 x86_64
Brief LTP test results summary
-----------------------------------------
PASS: 34
FAIL: 1
-----------------------------------------




el10 aarch64
Brief LTP test results summary
-----------------------------------------
PASS: 31
FAIL: 4
-----------------------------------------




el10 x86_64
Brief LTP test results summary
-----------------------------------------
PASS: 32
FAIL: 3
-----------------------------------------





el10 s390x
Brief LTP test results summary
-----------------------------------------
PASS: 22
FAIL: 13
-----------------------------------------




el9 s390x
Brief LTP test results summary
-----------------------------------------
PASS: 24
FAIL: 11
-----------------------------------------




el9 ppc64le
Brief LTP test results summary
-----------------------------------------
PASS: 18
FAIL: 17
-----------------------------------------




el9 aarch64
Brief LTP test results summary
-----------------------------------------
PASS: 33
FAIL: 2
-----------------------------------------




el10 ppc64le
Brief LTP test results summary
-----------------------------------------
PASS: 17
FAIL: 18
-----------------------------------------



So seems like there's some work across arches.  Will start trying fixing this one by one.

Hmmm, these testcases seem to be sensitive to parallelization, in which case they tend to be flaky.  Running them one by one seems to give more reliable test results:

TESTS=msgctl01 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=msgctl02 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=msgctl03 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=msgctl04  make ltpchecks  FAILs on s390 and ppc64le
TESTS=msgctl05 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=msgctl06 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=semctl01 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=semctl02 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=semctl03 make ltpchecks FAILs on s390 and ppc64le
TESTS=semctl04 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=semctl05 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=semctl06 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=semctl07 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=semctl08 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=semctl09 make ltpchecks FAILs on s390 and ppc64le
TESTS=semop01 make ltpchecks FAILs on s390 and ppc64le
TESTS=semop02 make ltpchecks FAILs on s390 and ppc64le
TESTS=semop03 make ltpchecks FAILs on s390 and ppc64le
TESTS=semop04 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=semop05 make ltpchecks OK (takes long)
TESTS=setns01 make ltpchecks FAILs on ppc64le
TESTS=setns02 make ltpchecks FAILs on s390 and ppc64le
TESTS=settimeofday01 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=settimeofday02 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=shmctl01 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=shmctl02 make ltpchecks FAILs on s390 and ppc64le
TESTS=shmctl03 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=shmctl04 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=shmctl05 make ltpchecks Is SLOW and FAILS everywhere except el9 x86_64
TESTS=shmctl06 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=shmctl07 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=shmctl08 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=sigpending02 make ltpchecks FAILs on s390 and ppc64le
TESTS=stime01 make ltpchecks FAILs on ppc64le
TESTS=stime02 make ltpchecks FAILs on ppc64le

Created attachment 185091 [details]
proposed patch

I'm going to update the above patch so that it also covers https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=509643 .

Created attachment 185095 [details]
proposed patch

This patch also covers https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=509643 .

Related testcases:
TESTS=bpf_prog01 make ltpchecks   OK
TESTS=bpf_map01 make ltpchecks    OK
TESTS=bpf_prog02 make ltpchecks   OK
TESTS=bpf_prog03 make ltpchecks   OK
TESTS=bpf_prog04 make ltpchecks   OK
TESTS=bpf_prog06 make ltpchecks   OK
TESTS=bpf_prog05 make ltpchecks   OK
TESTS=bpf_prog07 make ltpchecks   OK
TESTS=sethostname02 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=sethostname01 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=sethostname03 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=adjtimex01 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=adjtimex02 make ltpchecks OK
TESTS=adjtimex03 make ltpchecks OK

Could you change the word "hook" in the commit message to "syswrap"?
And add the two bug URLs to the commit message and NEWS?

Created attachment 185097 [details]
updated patch

Absolutely.  Thanks for your review!   Please check the updated patch.

Double checked the GEN/LIN macros, fixed two whitespace issues and pushed:

commit 53c66de8857300172c62827a4fc06e28685892a0 (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD)
Author: Martin Cermak <mcermak@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri Sep 19 11:47:14 2025 +0200

    Add missing ppc64-linux and s390x-linux syswraps existing on other arches
    
    This update adds following ppc64le and s390x syswraps:
     - sys_msgctl
     - sys_semctl
     - sys_semtimedop
     - sys_sethostname
     - sys_shmctl
     - sys_sigpending
     - sys_stime
    
    This update adds following ppc64le syswraps:
     - sys_setns
    
    This update adds following s390x syswraps:
     - sys_bpf
    
    Blacklist the shmctl05, as it is a long running one.  It does
    pass on all architectures afaics, but needs a relatively high
    LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL setting. So, let's skip that one.
    
    https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=509642
    https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=509643