I knew things like these are bound to happen. Hence, the first sentence
of my Announcement mail says:
..
The Linux Test Project test suite has been released for the month of
FEBRUARY 2009. Please see ltp/INSTALL file carefully, as, there has been
multiple changes for building/installing the
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 16:50 +0100, Francesco RUNDO wrote:
Hi,
I run inotify02 test on SH based arch running LTP-2009 release. I'd like
to submit a change on the code of inotify02.c file. I propose to replace
the following code:
while (i len) {
struct inotify_event *event;
Hi Serge,
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 13:19 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Add the first test for posix message queue namespaces, plus a
test to detect whether they are enabled.
Note that the kernel version check is currently bogus - these are
are in -mm.
Based on older version by Nadia Derbey.
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:23:53 +0100, Subrata Modak
subr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 16:50 +0100, Francesco RUNDO wrote:
I run inotify02 test on SH based arch running LTP-2009 release. I'd like
to submit a change on the code of inotify02.c file. I propose to replace
Hi Jiri,
I think that is the right time to start with arch dependent
compilation.
Here is the patch which solve my problem with hyperthreading
compilation.
Mike: Any comments? If not I'll prepare proper patch for Subrata.
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
+ifndef ARCH
+ARCH=i386
+endif
Jiří Paleček wrote:
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:23:53 +0100, Subrata Modak
subr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 16:50 +0100, Francesco RUNDO wrote:
I run inotify02 test on SH based arch running LTP-2009 release. I'd
like
to submit a change on the code of inotify02.c
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 11:03:58 +0100, Francesco RUNDO
francesco.ru...@st.com wrote:
Jiří Paleček wrote:
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:23:53 +0100, Subrata Modak
subr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 16:50 +0100, Francesco RUNDO wrote:
I run inotify02 test on SH based arch
AFAIK, to make sure that the kernel generated those and only those
events, that were predetermined by the test run. Otherwise, we'd have
an inconsistency in the checking procedure.
Does it happen somewhere, that the kernel legitimately generates
extra events (at the end)?
I think
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:30:27 +0100, Francesco RUNDO
francesco.ru...@st.com wrote:
AFAIK, to make sure that the kernel generated those and only those
events, that were predetermined by the test run. Otherwise, we'd have
an inconsistency in the checking procedure.
Does it happen
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:28:07 +0100, Michal Simek
michal.si...@petalogix.com wrote:
Hi Jiri,
I think that is the right time to start with arch dependent
compilation.
Here is the patch which solve my problem with hyperthreading
compilation.
Mike: Any comments? If not I'll prepare proper
Hi Subrata,
here is the version with updated copyrights and a README update.
thanks,
-serge
From caaabd21861b57d6943367efe54f36f9b3700b8d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nadia Derbey nadia.der...@bull.net
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:38:03 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] ltp: posix message queue
From d94e82179644f02d3561da104a054f099bc72416 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nadia Derbey nadia.der...@bull.net
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:00:40 +
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] ltp: posix mqns: test parent to child mq access
It's kind of redundant with test 01 since there is no hierarchical
From 3bf32de589f6f6a456dbe721729a0d7273dfb7c4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Serge Hallyn se...@us.ibm.com
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:35:16 +
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] ltp: posix mqns: test vfs and mq interaction
Test that the interaction between mqueuefs and ipc namespaces
is correct (one mqueuefs
From 270c6e79387f640f5a00254fa9d3353fc23addd8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Serge Hallyn se...@us.ibm.com
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 02:53:20 +
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] ltp: posix mqns: test that user mount of posixmq survives
the ipcns
If the mqueuefs for a ipc namespace is mounted in a mounts
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 17:02 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
From d94e82179644f02d3561da104a054f099bc72416 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nadia Derbey nadia.der...@bull.net
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:00:40 +
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] ltp: posix mqns: test parent to child mq access
It's kind of
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 17:02 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
From 270c6e79387f640f5a00254fa9d3353fc23addd8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Serge Hallyn se...@us.ibm.com
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 02:53:20 +
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] ltp: posix mqns: test that user mount of posixmq
survives the ipcns
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 17:02 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
From 3bf32de589f6f6a456dbe721729a0d7273dfb7c4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Serge Hallyn se...@us.ibm.com
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:35:16 +
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] ltp: posix mqns: test vfs and mq interaction
Test that the
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:
18 matches
Mail list logo
