On Wed, 2014-08-20 at 10:46 +0200, Jan Stancek wrote:
> Before kernel validates that fd is valid, it checks itimerspec struct
> with timespec_valid(). This struct is currently not initialised in test,
> which can cause failures, for example:
Thank you for pointing out this.
Best regards,
Zeng
>
> timerfd_settime01 1 TFAIL : timerfd_settime01.c:121: timerfd_settime()
> failed unexpectedly; expected: 9 - Bad file
> descriptor: TEST_ERRNO=EINVAL(22): Invalid argument
> timerfd_settime01 2 TFAIL : timerfd_settime01.c:121: timerfd_settime()
> failed unexpectedly; expected: 14 - Bad address:
> TEST_ERRNO=EINVAL(22): Invalid argument
>
> Fix this by giving fields in this struct some deterministic values
> (zero in this patch).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Stancek <jstan...@redhat.com>
> ---
> .../kernel/syscalls/timerfd/timerfd_settime01.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/timerfd/timerfd_settime01.c
> b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/timerfd/timerfd_settime01.c
> index d12e40a..a1b04a5 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/timerfd/timerfd_settime01.c
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/timerfd/timerfd_settime01.c
> @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ static void setup(void);
> static void timerfd_settime_verify(const struct test_case_t *);
> static void cleanup(void);
> static int exp_enos[] = { EBADF, EFAULT, EINVAL, 0 };
> +static struct itimerspec new_value;
>
> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> @@ -103,7 +104,6 @@ static void setup(void)
>
> static void timerfd_settime_verify(const struct test_case_t *test)
> {
> - struct itimerspec new_value;
> TEST(timerfd_settime(*test->fd, test->flags, &new_value,
> test->old_value));
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.
Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
