Mike/Robbie/Nate/Paul/Manoj/Michael,

Your thoughts ?

Regards--
Subrata

On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 14:50 +0100, Cyril Hrubis wrote: 
> Hi!
> > >> > I've been looking at sources for usctest.h again today 
> > >> > (lib/parse_opts.c) and I
> > >> > still have the feeling that this is badly written/broken code and 
> > >> > should be
> > >> > fixed but as there are thousands of tests that uses usctest interface 
> > >> > we should
> > >> > be careful when touching these sources. So IMHO the best approach is 
> > >> > to change
> > >> > one thing at the time and see if this was a good move.
> > >> >
> > >> > So let's start with TEST_PAUSE macro. Accordingly to comment in the 
> > >> > header,
> > >> > this expands to the code that waits for SIGUSR1 signal (and this is not
> > >> > generaly true).  This macro is expanded to the int 
> > >> > usc_global_setup_hook()
> > >> > function. The function forks the program accordingly to STD_COPIES and
> > >> > accordingly STD_PAUSE it sleeps for a SIGUSR1 or not (all forked 
> > >> > instances); it
> > >> > also changes program segment size with sbrk().
> > >> >
> > >> > Looking into the test sources, this is called when the test starts in 
> > >> > order to
> > >> > implement test parameters "-c n" (run n copies concurently) and "-p" 
> > >> > (pause
> > >> > test) and system variable USC_TP_SBRK. Do we need these parameters or 
> > >> > any of
> > >> > them? If you convice me that these parameters are usefull I would 
> > >> > gladly clean
> > >> > up and document code that implements TEST_PAUSE, otherwise I would 
> > >> > vote for
> > >> > removing them (or at least the useless ones).
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Okay, let me put it like this. Are parameters introduced by TEST_PAUSE 
> > >> really
> > >> used for anything? Would anybody cry if there where removed? Would be 
> > >> patch
> > >> removing them accepted and merged into CVS?
> > >>
> > >
> > > Anybody out there? I would really like to clean up and simplify the test 
> > > interface.
> > 
> >     I personally don't see why it should still exist when pan delivers
> > this level of functionality, but pan isn't compiled on UCLINUX
> > still... besides, I don't make the designed decisions.
> 
> Okay, do we have somebody who is in a charge of desing decisions? Or at least
> any mechanism to do that.
> 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience,
a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. 
Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Reply via email to