On Sat, 2014-02-08 at 12:26 +0000, Andre Marques wrote: > Hi, > > As discussed in [1], I created a new fstest to check the rename() > implementation against the POSIX specification [2]. > > What the attached patch does not test: > > - Testing the existance of a link visible to other processes during the > rename process (ensuring that there is always a reference to the file). > Not sure about the best way to test this. > > - Testing that after all processes close their references to a file > after it was removed by rename() the file contents are removed (or > marked as free space, I guess). I only found platform dependent ways of > dealing with disk block's.
I don't believe that rename() should lead to removal of file disk blocks (at least with a rename() on the same file-system, which seems to be all that POSIX requires be supported (see, e.g., the description of the EXDEV error case... though I do think it's ambiguous) and all RTEMS allows at present), since it's just changing the file name that links to that data. > - Testing errno values in error situations. There is already a fstest > named fserror which purpose seems to be checking errno values for a > bunch of functions (rename included, but with some errno values > missing). Not sure if I should put them in this test or add to fserror. > > > This test uses the MOUNTED IMFS filesystem, for no particular reason, so > if that's an issue please let me know. > > [1] - http://www.rtems.org/pipermail/rtems-users/2014-January/012378.html > > [2] - http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/rename.html > > --Andr? Marques -- Nick Withers Embedded Systems Programmer Department of Nuclear Physics, Research School of Physics and Engineering The Australian National University (CRICOS: 00120C) _______________________________________________ rtems-devel mailing list rtems-devel@rtems.org http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel
