Hi!
> > > ret = read(fd, buf, count);
> > > if (ret >= 0 || errno != errnum) {
> > > tst_resm(TFAIL, "read allows %s. returns %d: %s", msg, ret,
> > > strerror(errno));
> > > l_fail = TRUE;
> >
> > As far as I can see this code tests that read() has returned negative
> > value and in this case errno must be set.
> >
> > I.e.
> >
> > if ret >= 0 -> read hasn't failed -> FAILURE
> >
> > The errno != errnum is not evaluated unless the first condition has
> > failed (that means ret < 0) and in this case errno must be set.
> >
> > The condition is equivalent to !(ret < 0 && errno == errnum)
> >
> > Or am I missing something?
>
> I think he refers to output of tst_resm being possibly misleading
> in case ret >= 0, that call is using strerror(errno).
Ah, now that makes sense.
Looks like a reasonable solution. Any other solution that I can think of
would add one more if statement...
--
Cyril Hrubis
chru...@suse.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=164703151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
