Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 1/9] lib/tests: Check that igt_assert forwards correctly through igt_fork

[Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>]

Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-02-11 18:02:00)
> Note that without the igt_waitchildren nothing at all gets forwarded,
> maybe we should check for left-behind children somewhere on subtest
> exit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
> ---
>  lib/tests/igt_fork.c  | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  lib/tests/meson.build |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 88 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 lib/tests/igt_fork.c
> 
> diff --git a/lib/tests/igt_fork.c b/lib/tests/igt_fork.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..d495c7815e06
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/tests/igt_fork.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright © 2019 Intel Corporation
> + *
> + * Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
> + * copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"),
> + * to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation
> + * the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense,
> + * and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
> + * Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
> + *
> + * The above copyright notice and this permission notice (including the next
> + * paragraph) shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the
> + * Software.
> + *
> + * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
> + * IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
> + * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.  IN NO EVENT SHALL
> + * THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
> + * LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
> + * FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS
> + * IN THE SOFTWARE.
> + *
> + */
> +
> +#include <assert.h>
> +#include <errno.h>
> +#include <stdint.h>
> +#include <stdlib.h>
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +#include <sys/types.h>
> +#include <sys/wait.h>
> +
> +#include "igt_core.h"
> +
> +/*
> + * We need to hide assert from the cocci igt test refactor spatch.
> + *
> + * IMPORTANT: Test infrastructure tests are the only valid places where using
> + * assert is allowed.
> + */
> +#define internal_assert assert
> +
> +char test[] = "test";
> +char *argv_run[] = { test };
> +
> +static void igt_fork_vs_assert(void)
> +{
> +       igt_fork(i, 1) {
> +               igt_assert(0);
> +       }
> +
> +       igt_waitchildren();
> +}
> +
> +static int do_fork(void (*test_to_run)(void))
> +{
> +       int pid, status;
> +       int argc;
> +
> +       switch (pid = fork()) {
> +       case -1:
> +               internal_assert(0);
> +       case 0:
> +               argc = 1;
> +               igt_simple_init(argc, argv_run);
> +               test_to_run();
> +               igt_exit();
> +       default:
> +               while (waitpid(pid, &status, 0) == -1 &&
> +                      errno == EINTR)
> +                       ;
> +
> +               if(WIFSIGNALED(status))
> +                       return WTERMSIG(status) + 128;
> +
> +               return WEXITSTATUS(status);

Rather than reinventing status/exitcode, why not just return status?
-Chris
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev