Re: [LTP] [PATCH 2/2] rmdir/rmdir02.c: add ELOOP, EROFS and EBUSY error value tests

于 05/19/2014 08:15 PM, chru...@suse.cz 写道: > Hi! >>> I've removed the EUID changes for all because these has no effect on the >>> test behavior (at least I haven't figured out why they are needed). >> >> I tested with the UEID is aimed to prove the system call can be executed >> right with a norm

[LTP] [PATCH] lib: safe_stdio.c, tst_virt.c: delete the redundant code

Since tst_brkm() can break remaining test cases, the code after this function is redundant. Signed-off-by: Xing Gu --- lib/safe_stdio.c | 1 - lib/tst_virt.c | 1 - 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/safe_stdio.c b/lib/safe_stdio.c index 3463659..e202386 100644 --- a/lib/safe_st

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 2/2] syscalls/rename/rename11.c: add ELOOP, EMLINK and EROFS error value tests

Hi, On 05/20/2014 12:29 AM, chru...@suse.cz wrote: > Hi! >> Note: int rename(const char *old, const char *new); >> For EMLINK error value test: the file named by old is a directory and the >> link count of the parent directory of new would exceed {LINK_MAX}. >> >> This test will work on ext2 and e

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] lib: safe_stdio.c, tst_virt.c: delete the redundant code

Hi! > Since tst_brkm() can break remaining test cases, the code > after this function is redundant. Good catch, pushed, thanks. -- Cyril Hrubis chru...@suse.cz -- "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Test

Re: [LTP] [PATCH RFC v2] change MAKE_TARGETS's dependency to normal prerequisites and order-only prerequisites

Hi, On 05/19/2014 08:34 PM, chru...@suse.cz wrote: > Hi! >> -MAKE_DEPS := $(LIBLTP) $(LSN_H) >> +MAKE_ORDER_ONLY_DEPS:= $(LSN_H) >> +MAKE_NORMAL_DEPS:= $(LIBLTP) > Looking at this, the LSN_H is linux_syscall_numbers.h header, shouldn't > we recompile a testcases if this header change

[LTP] [RFC PATCH] A draft of the rt_sigaction syscall wrapper.

Signed-off-by: Stanislav Kholmanskikh --- Hi! I think that instead of an addition of "the common syscall preparation" to a define, it would be better to implement a wrapper to the rt_sigaction syscall. Like this one. Its basis is a combination of glibc implementations of sigaction() for diffe

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 2/2] syscalls/rename/rename11.c: add ELOOP, EMLINK and EROFS error value tests

Hi! > Yeah, it's expected behavior for ext4. > Please this this url: > https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Storage_Administration_Guide/installconfig-fs.html > > Note: here the discussion is for directory. > > I checked the ext4 kernel source code i

Re: [LTP] [PATCH RFC v2] change MAKE_TARGETS's dependency to normal prerequisites and order-only prerequisites

Hi! > Here I met some issues. Could you please give me some hint and currently I > do not know how to fix it. > > When I applied the v2 Patch and according to your comments, > make "MAKE_NORMAL_DEPS:= $(LIBLTP) $(LSN_H)" in > include/mk/testcases.mk. > > For this rule "$(MAKE_TARGETS):

Re: [LTP] [RFC PATCH] A draft of the rt_sigaction syscall wrapper.

Hi! > I think that instead of an addition of "the common syscall preparation" to a > define, > it would be better to implement a wrapper to the rt_sigaction syscall. > > Like this one. > > Its basis is a combination of glibc implementations of sigaction() for > different > platforms. But it al

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/2] renameat/renameat01.c: cleanup

Hi! > +#define TESTDIR "testdir" > +#define NEW_TESTDIR "newtestdir" > +#define TESTFILE "testfile" > +#define NEW_TESTFILE "newtestfile" > +#define TESTFILE2 "testdir/testfile" > +#define NEW_TESTFILE2 "newtestdir/newtestfile" > +#define TESTFILE3 "/tmp/testfile3" > +#define NEW_TESTFILE3 "/tmp/ne

Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] sbrk/sbrk02.c: add ENOMEM errno test

Hi! > looks good to me. I saw sbrk02 taking up to couple seconds > to complete on some systems, but that seems acceptable. > If anyone objects, we could change setup() to increment > even more rapidly. Generally the testrun should be as fast as possible (think of a farm of kernel builders that get

Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] sbrk/sbrk02.c: add ENOMEM errno test

Hi! > +#if !defined(UCLINUX) If none of the sbrk tests runs on uClinux the UCLINUX ifdefs should be removed and the whole directory should be skipped on build and install. (by adding into UCLINUX FILTER_OUT_DIRS in testacses/kernel/syscalls/Makefile) Otherwise the test looks fine. Jan can you pl

Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] sbrk/sbrk01.c: cleanup

Hi! > * Delete some useless commtents. > * Move the test body from main() to sbrk_verify(). > * Remove tst_tmpdir(). > * Some cleanup. Pushed after I've removed the UCLINUX #ifdefs and added sbrk directory to UCLINUX FILTER_OUT_DIRS into ../Makefile -- Cyril Hrubis chru...@suse.cz -

Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] sbrk/sbrk02.c: add ENOMEM errno test

- Original Message - > From: chru...@suse.cz > To: "Zeng Linggang" > Cc: "Jan Stancek" , "ltp-list" > > Sent: Tuesday, 20 May, 2014 5:56:25 PM > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] sbrk/sbrk02.c: add ENOMEM errno test > > Hi! > > +#if !defined(UCLINUX) > > If none of the sbrk tests r

Re: [LTP] [PATCH RFC v2] change MAKE_TARGETS's dependency to normal prerequisites and order-only prerequisites

Hi, On 05/20/2014 09:05 PM, chru...@suse.cz wrote: > Well that is the problem with implicit rule that pulls in all the > dependencies. > > The problem is that Make is confused because we don't go the *.c + *.h > -> *.o -> binary route but take shortcut *.c -> binary instead. > > If you look at th