From: Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v1] rt_sigpending02: reuse code from sigpending02
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 09:31:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f2d20c15-6269-f386-ca7d-1c6c8f948867@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190313114237.GA261142@google.com>
On 03/13/2019 04:42 AM, Matthias Maennich wrote:
> I am not sure multiplexing is the right approach here (not saying it is not!).
> In case of (rt_)sigpending, I would like to see them as separate binaries that
> effectively do disjunct things.
Ok I don't have a strong feeling either way, keeping them as separate
binaries seems a little more complex as far as the build goes (i.e.
Makefile stuff that has to reach into a sibling directory), but it's
also slightly clearer there are tests for both syscalls when perusing
the source.
> There might be the case that sigpending is not available on that
> particular kernel and rt_sigpending is. I would like the sigpending
> to fail with TCONF and the rt_sigpending to TPASS in that case. Is
> that something that can be achieved with multiplexing?
Yep tests can return multiple results (have multiple sub-tests) so this
is doable.
> I was already working on a v2 of this patch set to add a further test case and
> will send this out shortly. I would like to reconsider multiplexing at a later
> time and for now follow the pattern of other syscall related tests like
> sigwait, sigtimedwait, rt_sigtimedwait.
SGTM
cheers,
steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-13 16:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-08 16:38 [LTP] [PATCH v1] rt_sigpending02: reuse code from sigpending02 Matthias Maennich
2019-03-12 17:11 ` Steve Muckle
2019-03-13 9:42 ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-03-13 11:42 ` Matthias Maennich
2019-03-13 16:31 ` Steve Muckle [this message]
2019-03-13 12:02 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 0/2] new test cases for sigpending / rt_sigpending Matthias Maennich
2019-03-13 12:02 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] rt_sigpending02: reuse code from sigpending02 Matthias Maennich
2019-03-13 12:02 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] sigpending/rt_sigpending: add basic test Matthias Maennich
2019-03-19 0:04 ` Steve Muckle
2019-03-19 11:31 ` [LTP] [PATCH v3 0/2] new test cases for sigpending / rt_sigpending Matthias Maennich
2019-03-19 11:31 ` [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/2] rt_sigpending02: reuse code from sigpending02 Matthias Maennich
2019-03-19 16:44 ` Petr Vorel
2019-03-19 16:52 ` Petr Vorel
2019-03-19 11:31 ` [LTP] [PATCH v3 2/2] sigpending/rt_sigpending: add basic test Matthias Maennich
2019-03-19 16:58 ` Petr Vorel
2019-03-19 17:24 ` Petr Vorel
2019-03-19 18:41 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 0/3] rt_sigpending02: reuse code from sigpending02 Matthias Maennich
2019-03-19 18:41 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 1/3] " Matthias Maennich
2019-03-19 18:41 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 2/3] sigpending/rt_sigpending: add basic test Matthias Maennich
2019-03-19 18:41 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 3/3] sigpending: improve portability by using tst_get_bad_addr() Matthias Maennich
2019-03-21 18:50 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 0/3] rt_sigpending02: reuse code from sigpending02 Petr Vorel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f2d20c15-6269-f386-ca7d-1c6c8f948867@google.com \
--to=smuckle@google.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.