Re: _[PATCH_v2_3/3]_tests/migration：fix_unreachable_path_in_stress_test

[maozy <maozhongyi@cmss.chinamobile.com>]

Hi,  Laurent

On 10/1/19 11:46 PM, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> Le 11/09/2019 à 05:31, Mao Zhongyi a écrit :
>> if stress function always return 0, the path
>> 'if (stress(ramsizeGB, ncpus) < 0)' is nerver unreachable,
>> so fix it to allow the test failed.
>>
>> Cc: armbru@redhat.com
>> Cc: laurent@vivier.eu
>> Cc: tony.nguyen@bt.com
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mao Zhongyi <maozhongyi@cmss.chinamobile.com>
>> ---
>>   tests/migration/stress.c | 5 ++---
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/migration/stress.c b/tests/migration/stress.c
>> index 19a6eff5fd..35903d90c4 100644
>> --- a/tests/migration/stress.c
>> +++ b/tests/migration/stress.c
>> @@ -224,6 +224,7 @@ static int stressone(unsigned long long ramsizeMB)
>>               }
>>           }
>>       }
>> +    return 0;
>>   }
> before the return, we have an infinite loop "while(1) { }".
>
> So this part is dead code.
>
> In fact, if the function exits, it's because it fails, otherwise it
> loops infinitely, so I think we should change its type to void and
> stress should always return -1.
Yes, I think it's ok to change stressone typo to void because
no one cares about its return value, but if make stress always
return -1, main will always exited in exit_failure, like this:

...
     if (stress(ramsizeGB, ncpus) < 0)
         exit_failure();

     exit_success();
}

so, perhaps also change stress typo to void may be good. then:

...
     stress(ramsizeGB, ncpus);

     exit_success();
}

Anther way , make stressone return 0 when infinite loop fails to
exit, then main can handle both success and failure case.

what do you think?

Thanks,
Mao
> Thanks,
> Laurent
>