On Wednesday 04 March 2009 02:42:17 Németh Márton wrote:
+CFLAGS = -O2 -Wall -Wextra
CFLAGS should always be appended, not set. optimization flags should never be
added. -Wextra will cause failures with gcc-3.3 and older.
+clean:
+ rm -f $(OBJS)
+ rm -f test_agp
no point in
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 07:18 +0100, Németh Márton wrote:
Make the acpi device-driver test compilable with Linux kernel 2.6.28.
Completely drop supporting older kernels which are not compatible with
2.6.28.
Signed-off-by: Márton Németh nm...@freemail.hu
Thanks.
Regards--
Subrata
Ok, just to better describe my opinion (I hope without
misunderstanding ;-)
In the while loop we're analyzing, you rightly process the notified
events with different checks.Ok, it is right.
My suggest is to avoid to use also the check (with TFAIL) related
to TST_COUNT as it will be of
Hi Jiri,
Also, the compiler really should set architecture spcific macros based
on the target.
I don't know full LTP history but I think that is primary focus on x86
where is target the same arch where is LTP compiled.
Certainly not. Only RedHat-originated patches are i386+x86-64 only :)
Andrew Vagin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 10:28:21AM +0100, Francesco RUNDO wrote:
Ok, just to better describe my opinion (I hope without misunderstanding
;-)
In the while loop we're analyzing, you rightly process the notified
events with different checks.Ok, it is right.
My
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 10:28:21AM +0100, Francesco RUNDO wrote:
Ok, just to better describe my opinion (I hope without misunderstanding
;-)
In the while loop we're analyzing, you rightly process the notified
events with different checks.Ok, it is right.
My suggest is to avoid to use
Cleanup the Makefiles for the user space part of the device-driver tests.
Add make clean.
Signed-off-by: Márton Németh nm...@freemail.hu
---
Index: testcases/kernel/device-drivers/agp/user_space/Makefile
===
RCS file:
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 04:33:29 Michal Simek wrote:
BTW: You haven't answer me a question who will do a patch for it (your
sed command). Below is patch for your proposal. If you agree with it
I'll create proper patch for Subrata.
looks fine to me (ignoring line wrap issues). thanks!
-mike
Subrata Modak wrote:
Hi Casey,
On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 19:08 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote:
Subrata Modak wrote:
Hi Casey,
Thanks for these tests. However there are some comments below:
1) There is a little bit of lack of documentation. Can you please attach
atleast a README,
Subrata Modak wrote:
Hi Sridhar,
I downloaded lksctp-tools-1.0.9 from http://sourceforge.net/projects/lksctp
to update the SCTP tests in LTP:
http://ltp.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ltp/ltp/testcases/network/sctp/,
The following patch would have served the update. However, i get some broken
On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 08:15 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Subrata Modak (subr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com):
Thanks Serge Nadia for contributing these tests to LTP. I had one
round of testing before merging them. Please see the results and the
config file attached.
Hi Subrata,
did
Hi Casey,
On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 19:09 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote:
Subrata Modak wrote:
Hi Casey,
On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 19:08 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote:
Subrata Modak wrote:
Hi Casey,
Thanks for these tests. However there are some comments below:
1) There is a
Hi,
On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 10:33 +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
Hi Jiri,
Also, the compiler really should set architecture spcific macros based
on the target.
I don't know full LTP history but I think that is primary focus on x86
where is target the same arch where is LTP compiled.
13 matches
Mail list logo