Its been a while since I looke at that code, but as a general comment, any clean up effort is good, but please make sure you test it and release a beta version for people to try so that you dont break existing users. I am more interested in seeing a modified version and trying that out, rather than reading a proposal.
--- manjo On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Subrata Modak wrote: > 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
