On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 10:22 +, David Drysdale wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On systems which don't implement sys_execveat(), this test produces a
> > lot of output.
> >
> > Add a check at the beginning to see if the syscall is present, and if
> > not
On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 10:22 +, David Drysdale wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Michael Ellerman m...@ellerman.id.au wrote:
On systems which don't implement sys_execveat(), this test produces a
lot of output.
Add a check at the beginning to see if the syscall is present, and if
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On systems which don't implement sys_execveat(), this test produces a
> lot of output.
>
> Add a check at the beginning to see if the syscall is present, and if
> not just note one error and return.
Good point, thanks.
> Signed-off-by:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Michael Ellerman m...@ellerman.id.au wrote:
On systems which don't implement sys_execveat(), this test produces a
lot of output.
Add a check at the beginning to see if the syscall is present, and if
not just note one error and return.
Good point, thanks.
On systems which don't implement sys_execveat(), this test produces a
lot of output.
Add a check at the beginning to see if the syscall is present, and if
not just note one error and return.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman
---
tools/testing/selftests/exec/execveat.c | 8
1 file
On systems which don't implement sys_execveat(), this test produces a
lot of output.
Add a check at the beginning to see if the syscall is present, and if
not just note one error and return.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman m...@ellerman.id.au
---
tools/testing/selftests/exec/execveat.c | 8
6 matches
Mail list logo