On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 11:43 +0900, Masatake YAMATO wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm interested in writing testcases for fadvise64 > > > and posix_fadvise. I'd like to get some hints before > > > starting work. > > > > Thanks. You will get all hints that you require for > > writing new test cases. > > Thank you. > > > > > > > Test cases for fadvise64 may should be put at > > > ltp/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fadvise64. > > > > You are correct. You have to put the corresponding test cases > > source code and Makefile in this directory. By the way, how many > > test cases are you going to write for this syscall ? > > At least for each errors(EBADF and EINVAL) for each ADVICE > parameters. But not sure now.
It would be nice if you separate each functionality test in to separate source code, like you can have fadvise64_01.c, fadvise64_02.c, fadvise64_03.c, etc, wherein each of C files will have testing pertaining to one functionality. > > > > > > > How about posix_fadvise? > > > At first sight, I think it should be put at > > > somewhere in ltp/testcases/open_posix_testsuite/. > > > However, it seems that open_posix_testsuite/ comes from > > > posixtest project. So should I contact with posixtest project? > > > Comparing LTP, posixtest is not so active these days. So > > > I wonder where I should submit a testcase for posix_fadvise. > > > > You should nevertheless go ahead and write it in the posixtest > > format and submit the same to posixtest and cc to LTP-list. We will > > see whether there is any response from posixtest. However we will > > include it inside LTPś OPEN_POSIX_TESTSUITE and will inform them > > about the code changes in POSIXTEST available in LTP, when they > > do their next release. Even if they are not active, we will do the > > backup on their part. > > I see. > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Masatake YAMATO > > > > Also please let me know if you are interested to write other test cases > > also (may be for some more missing system calls and so). > > I had a plan to write tests for several system calls. However, I've > just found that most of them are already in LTP. So what I can do is > adding more test cases to existed ones. There are huge set of System Calls tests which are still missing in LTP. Why don´t you give a try for all those once by one. You can go ahead and write the basic test cases for the missing system calls tests. Then we can keep patching them based on user feedback and more functionality coverage. I assure you all support for this. --Subrata > > Masatake YAMATO > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Ltp-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
