Hi!

On 07/01/2013 07:10 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi!
>>   create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/firmware/Makefile
>>   create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/firmware/fw_load_kernel/.gitignore
>>   create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/firmware/fw_load_kernel/Makefile
>>   create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/firmware/fw_load_kernel/README
>>   create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/firmware/fw_load_kernel/fw_load.c
>>   create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/firmware/fw_load_user/.gitignore
>>   create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/firmware/fw_load_user/Makefile
>>   create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/firmware/fw_load_user/README
>>   create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/firmware/fw_load_user/fw_load.c
>>
>> diff --git a/runtest/syscalls b/runtest/syscalls
>> index eba0200..88471fa 100644
>> --- a/runtest/syscalls
>> +++ b/runtest/syscalls
>> @@ -314,6 +314,8 @@ ftruncate04_64 ftruncate04.sh 64
>>   #futimesat test cases
>>   futimesat01 futimesat01
>>
>> +fw_load fw_load
>> +
>>   getcontext01 getcontext01
> We created kernel_misc runtest file just lately and I think that this
> test is better suited to be added to that runtest file rather than to
> syscalls, do you agree?
OK, is it possible to add kernel_misc to default scenario?

>> +
>> +            /* create test firmware file */
>> +            asprintf(&fi->file, "%s/n%d_%s", fi->dir, fw_num, fw_name);
>> +
>> +            FILE *f = SAFE_FOPEN(cleanup, fi->file, "w");
>> +            if (f == NULL)
>> +                    tst_brkm(TBROK, cleanup, "Failed to create firmware");
> You will never get to the if (f == NULL) branch, safe operations will abort 
> the
> test and call cleanup callback in case something went wrong, that is the
> whole point of the SAFE_ interface.
>
Yes, changed to SAFE_FOPEN, but forgot to remove NULL check & 
tst_brkm(), I will fix it.
>> +            int k;
>> +            for (k = 0; k<  fw_size; ++k)
>> +                    fputc(fw_num, f);
>> +            SAFE_FCLOSE(cleanup, f);
>> +
>> +            fi->remove_file = 1;
> Just to be extra sure it gets removed, I think that you should turn this flag
> on once the file was succesfully opened.
>
OK.

Thanks,
Alexey

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Reply via email to