>>>> I will try to produce more feedback in the future :) > > Hi Pavel, > > Did you get a chance to generate more detailed feedback on the entire > set of namespace test cases in LTP.
I've looked over ipcns tests in (I hope) details. The thing I noticed, is that the ID isolation (sysvipc/shmnstest.c file) is checked for shmem only - I'd check for all - sem and msg as well. Besides, I'd test one more thing (with all the sorts of sysVipc): Create two shmem segments with the same ID in different namespaces and check that writing to memory in one namespace doesn't affect such in the other. The same for semaphores - e.g. up-ing the sem in on ns doesn't wake a task in the other one - and msg - queued message cannot be picked up from the other namespace. The other thing, that is not tested is the ipcs utility - I expectd it would be the first to get tested. To be absolutely sane - I'd even test the /proc/sysvipc/ entries, since ipcs doesn't get the info from them, but calls system calls instead. UTS ns is really *very* simple - I cannot even invent something interesting to test - the current tests look OK from the first glance. > Regards-- > Subrata ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
