* [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
[not found] <1397094487.31209591.1410431434756.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
@ 2014-09-11 10:30 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-11 14:04 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Xiong Zhou @ 2014-09-11 10:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ltp-list
And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
to "negative whence".
Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
---
testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c | 36 +++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
index 30a1ea9..9db88e8 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
@@ -969,6 +969,15 @@ void catch1(int sig)
got1++;
}
+static void testcheck_end(int check_fail, char *msg)
+{
+ if (check_fail) {
+ tst_resm(TFAIL, "%s FAILED", msg);
+ } else {
+ tst_resm(TPASS, "%s PASSED", msg);
+ }
+}
+
int main(int ac, char **av)
{
int lc;
@@ -1009,20 +1018,11 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
* mandatory locking
*/
(void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 0, 0, 36);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 1 FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 1 PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 1");
/* Now try with negative values for L_start and L_len */
(void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 5, 36, 45);
-
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 2 FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 2 PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 2");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 1");
@@ -1094,13 +1094,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
close(fd);
unlink(tmpname);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
- "locking FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
- "locking PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Test with negative whence locking");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 3");
/* //block4: */
@@ -1223,11 +1217,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
close(fd);
unlink(tmpname);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Test of locks on file");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 4");
}
cleanup();
--
1.8.3.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want excitement?
Manually upgrade your production database.
When you want reliability, choose Perforce
Perforce version control. Predictably reliable.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-11 10:30 ` [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up Xiong Zhou
@ 2014-09-11 14:04 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2014-09-19 6:46 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-19 6:47 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 " Xiong Zhou
0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Stanislav Kholmanskikh @ 2014-09-11 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xiong Zhou, ltp-list
Hi!
On 09/11/2014 02:30 PM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
> And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
> to "negative whence".
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
> ---
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c | 36 +++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
> index 30a1ea9..9db88e8 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
> @@ -969,6 +969,15 @@ void catch1(int sig)
> got1++;
> }
>
> +static void testcheck_end(int check_fail, char *msg)
> +{
> + if (check_fail) {
> + tst_resm(TFAIL, "%s FAILED", msg);
> + } else {
> + tst_resm(TPASS, "%s PASSED", msg);
> + }
> +}
There are many places left in fcntl14.c where you can put this
"deduplication". Why aren't you doing it? ;)
> +
> int main(int ac, char **av)
> {
> int lc;
> @@ -1009,20 +1018,11 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
> * mandatory locking
> */
> (void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 0, 0, 36);
> - if (fail) {
> - tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 1 FAILED");
> - } else {
> - tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 1 PASSED");
> - }
> + testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 1");
>
> /* Now try with negative values for L_start and L_len */
> (void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 5, 36, 45);
> -
> - if (fail) {
> - tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 2 FAILED");
> - } else {
> - tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 2 PASSED");
> - }
> + testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 2");
>
> tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 1");
>
> @@ -1094,13 +1094,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
> close(fd);
> unlink(tmpname);
>
> - if (fail) {
> - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
> - "locking FAILED");
> - } else {
> - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
> - "locking PASSED");
> - }
> + testcheck_end(fail, "Test with negative whence locking");
> tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 3");
>
> /* //block4: */
> @@ -1223,11 +1217,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
> close(fd);
> unlink(tmpname);
>
> - if (fail) {
> - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file FAILED");
> - } else {
> - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file PASSED");
> - }
> + testcheck_end(fail, "Test of locks on file");
> tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 4");
> }
> cleanup();
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want excitement?
Manually upgrade your production database.
When you want reliability, choose Perforce
Perforce version control. Predictably reliable.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-11 14:04 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
@ 2014-09-19 6:46 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-23 11:52 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2014-09-19 6:47 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 " Xiong Zhou
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Xiong Zhou @ 2014-09-19 6:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stanislav Kholmanskikh, ltp-list
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>
> To: "Xiong Zhou" <xzhou@redhat.com>, ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 10:04:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
>
> Hi!
>
> On 09/11/2014 02:30 PM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
> > And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
> > to "negative whence".
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c | 36
> > +++++++++++--------------------
> > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
> > b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
> > index 30a1ea9..9db88e8 100644
> > --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
> > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
> > @@ -969,6 +969,15 @@ void catch1(int sig)
> > got1++;
> > }
> >
> > +static void testcheck_end(int check_fail, char *msg)
> > +{
> > + if (check_fail) {
> > + tst_resm(TFAIL, "%s FAILED", msg);
> > + } else {
> > + tst_resm(TPASS, "%s PASSED", msg);
> > + }
> > +}
>
> There are many places left in fcntl14.c where you can put this
> "deduplication". Why aren't you doing it? ;)
I think I have done all of them, I cannot find other places which are applicable to this function.
I will resend this series based on your last comments.
Thanks.
>
> > +
> > int main(int ac, char **av)
> > {
> > int lc;
> > @@ -1009,20 +1018,11 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
> > * mandatory locking
> > */
> > (void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 0, 0, 36);
> > - if (fail) {
> > - tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 1 FAILED");
> > - } else {
> > - tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 1 PASSED");
> > - }
> > + testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 1");
> >
> > /* Now try with negative values for L_start and L_len */
> > (void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 5, 36, 45);
> > -
> > - if (fail) {
> > - tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 2 FAILED");
> > - } else {
> > - tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 2 PASSED");
> > - }
> > + testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 2");
> >
> > tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 1");
> >
> > @@ -1094,13 +1094,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
> > close(fd);
> > unlink(tmpname);
> >
> > - if (fail) {
> > - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
> > - "locking FAILED");
> > - } else {
> > - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
> > - "locking PASSED");
> > - }
> > + testcheck_end(fail, "Test with negative whence locking");
> > tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 3");
> >
> > /* //block4: */
> > @@ -1223,11 +1217,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
> > close(fd);
> > unlink(tmpname);
> >
> > - if (fail) {
> > - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file FAILED");
> > - } else {
> > - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file PASSED");
> > - }
> > + testcheck_end(fail, "Test of locks on file");
> > tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 4");
> > }
> > cleanup();
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that Matters.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=160591471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-11 14:04 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2014-09-19 6:46 ` Xiong Zhou
@ 2014-09-19 6:47 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-25 7:17 ` [LTP] [PATCH v3 " Xiong Zhou
1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Xiong Zhou @ 2014-09-19 6:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stanislav Kholmanskikh; +Cc: ltp-list
And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
to "negative whence".
Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
---
testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c | 36 +++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
index 30a1ea9..9db88e8 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
@@ -969,6 +969,15 @@ void catch1(int sig)
got1++;
}
+static void testcheck_end(int check_fail, char *msg)
+{
+ if (check_fail) {
+ tst_resm(TFAIL, "%s FAILED", msg);
+ } else {
+ tst_resm(TPASS, "%s PASSED", msg);
+ }
+}
+
int main(int ac, char **av)
{
int lc;
@@ -1009,20 +1018,11 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
* mandatory locking
*/
(void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 0, 0, 36);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 1 FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 1 PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 1");
/* Now try with negative values for L_start and L_len */
(void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 5, 36, 45);
-
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 2 FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 2 PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 2");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 1");
@@ -1094,13 +1094,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
close(fd);
unlink(tmpname);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
- "locking FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
- "locking PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Test with negative whence locking");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 3");
/* //block4: */
@@ -1223,11 +1217,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
close(fd);
unlink(tmpname);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Test of locks on file");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 4");
}
cleanup();
--
1.8.3.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that Matters.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=160591471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-19 6:46 ` Xiong Zhou
@ 2014-09-23 11:52 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Stanislav Kholmanskikh @ 2014-09-23 11:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xiong Zhou, ltp-list
Hi!
On 09/19/2014 10:46 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>
>> To: "Xiong Zhou" <xzhou@redhat.com>, ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 10:04:32 PM
>> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 09/11/2014 02:30 PM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
>>> And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
>>> to "negative whence".
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c | 36
>>> +++++++++++--------------------
>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
>>> b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
>>> index 30a1ea9..9db88e8 100644
>>> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
>>> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
>>> @@ -969,6 +969,15 @@ void catch1(int sig)
>>> got1++;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static void testcheck_end(int check_fail, char *msg)
>>> +{
>>> + if (check_fail) {
>>> + tst_resm(TFAIL, "%s FAILED", msg);
>>> + } else {
>>> + tst_resm(TPASS, "%s PASSED", msg);
>>> + }
>>> +}
>>
>> There are many places left in fcntl14.c where you can put this
>> "deduplication". Why aren't you doing it? ;)
>
> I think I have done all of them, I cannot find other places which are applicable to this function.
Sorry, but by "many places" I meant block 2.
Last time I commented your [PATCH 2/3] with "And testcheck_end() to
block 2 should be introduced in the previous patch."
Could you please add all testcheck_end() invocations in the first patch
of the series?
Thanks.
>
> I will resend this series based on your last comments.
>
> Thanks.
>
>>
>>> +
>>> int main(int ac, char **av)
>>> {
>>> int lc;
>>> @@ -1009,20 +1018,11 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
>>> * mandatory locking
>>> */
>>> (void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 0, 0, 36);
>>> - if (fail) {
>>> - tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 1 FAILED");
>>> - } else {
>>> - tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 1 PASSED");
>>> - }
>>> + testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 1");
>>>
>>> /* Now try with negative values for L_start and L_len */
>>> (void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 5, 36, 45);
>>> -
>>> - if (fail) {
>>> - tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 2 FAILED");
>>> - } else {
>>> - tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 2 PASSED");
>>> - }
>>> + testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 2");
>>>
>>> tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 1");
>>>
>>> @@ -1094,13 +1094,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
>>> close(fd);
>>> unlink(tmpname);
>>>
>>> - if (fail) {
>>> - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
>>> - "locking FAILED");
>>> - } else {
>>> - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
>>> - "locking PASSED");
>>> - }
>>> + testcheck_end(fail, "Test with negative whence locking");
>>> tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 3");
>>>
>>> /* //block4: */
>>> @@ -1223,11 +1217,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
>>> close(fd);
>>> unlink(tmpname);
>>>
>>> - if (fail) {
>>> - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file FAILED");
>>> - } else {
>>> - tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file PASSED");
>>> - }
>>> + testcheck_end(fail, "Test of locks on file");
>>> tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 4");
>>> }
>>> cleanup();
>>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer
Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports
Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper
Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-19 6:47 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 " Xiong Zhou
@ 2014-09-25 7:17 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-25 12:07 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Xiong Zhou @ 2014-09-25 7:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stanislav Kholmanskikh; +Cc: ltp-list
And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
to "negative whence".
Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
---
testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c | 48 ++++++++++---------------------
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
index 30a1ea9..b110d35 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fcntl/fcntl14.c
@@ -969,6 +969,15 @@ void catch1(int sig)
got1++;
}
+static void testcheck_end(int check_fail, char *msg)
+{
+ if (check_fail) {
+ tst_resm(TFAIL, "%s FAILED", msg);
+ } else {
+ tst_resm(TPASS, "%s PASSED", msg);
+ }
+}
+
int main(int ac, char **av)
{
int lc;
@@ -1009,20 +1018,11 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
* mandatory locking
*/
(void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 0, 0, 36);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 1 FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 1 PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 1");
/* Now try with negative values for L_start and L_len */
(void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, 0777, 5, 36, 45);
-
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 1, test 2 FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 1, test 2 PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Block 1, test 2");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 1");
@@ -1035,20 +1035,12 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
*/
(void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, S_ENFMT | S_IRUSR |
S_IWUSR, 0, 0, 36);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 2, test 1 FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 2, test 1 PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Block 2, test 1");
/* Now try negative values for L_start and L_len */
(void)run_test(O_CREAT | O_RDWR | O_TRUNC, S_ENFMT | S_IRUSR |
S_IWUSR, 5, 36, 45);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TFAIL, "Block 2, test 2 FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TPASS, "Block 2, test 2 PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Block 2, test 2");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 2");
@@ -1094,13 +1086,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
close(fd);
unlink(tmpname);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
- "locking FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test with mandatory "
- "locking PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Test with negative whence locking");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 3");
/* //block4: */
@@ -1223,11 +1209,7 @@ int main(int ac, char **av)
close(fd);
unlink(tmpname);
- if (fail) {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file FAILED");
- } else {
- tst_resm(TINFO, "Test of locks on file PASSED");
- }
+ testcheck_end(fail, "Test of locks on file");
tst_resm(TINFO, "Exit block 4");
}
cleanup();
--
1.8.3.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer
Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports
Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper
Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-25 7:17 ` [LTP] [PATCH v3 " Xiong Zhou
@ 2014-09-25 12:07 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2014-09-26 3:23 ` Xiong Zhou
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Stanislav Kholmanskikh @ 2014-09-25 12:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xiong Zhou; +Cc: ltp-list
Hi!
On 09/25/2014 11:17 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
>
> And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
> to "negative whence".
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
> ---
Patch 1 and patch 2 of the series are pushed.
Btw, patch 2 didn't apply to index correctly with 'git am', I had to
manually apply it.
I'm experiencing difficulties with checking patch 3. In particular,
after applying your patch utime02 fails on NFSv4 with
2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64 kernel.
I'm not quite sure if it's a kernel problem or test case error. Still
investigating.
Could you please check the test case in your RHEL 6 environment as well?
Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer
Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports
Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper
Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-25 12:07 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
@ 2014-09-26 3:23 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-26 12:36 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Xiong Zhou @ 2014-09-26 3:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stanislav Kholmanskikh; +Cc: ltp-list
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>
> To: "Xiong Zhou" <xzhou@redhat.com>
> Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 8:07:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
>
> Hi!
>
> On 09/25/2014 11:17 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
> >
> > And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
> > to "negative whence".
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
> > ---
>
> Patch 1 and patch 2 of the series are pushed.
> Btw, patch 2 didn't apply to index correctly with 'git am', I had to
> manually apply it.
>
Sorry for the inconvenience.. I should keep my master branch updated.
> I'm experiencing difficulties with checking patch 3. In particular,
> after applying your patch utime02 fails on NFSv4 with
> 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64 kernel.
Yes, I got the same results on 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6 kernel, v3 pass v4 fail.
>
> I'm not quite sure if it's a kernel problem or test case error. Still
> investigating.
>
> Could you please check the test case in your RHEL 6 environment as well?
I double checked that utime02 did pass on upstream 2.6.32 kernel
both NFSv3 and NFSv4 in my env.
On latest RHEL-6 kernel, both NFSv3 and NFSv4 passed utime02 test case.
All failed test_output are just like:
tst_tmpdir.c:158: chown(/nfsmnt/ltp-6L6Oqow6wv/utiMPq3y5, -1, 0) \
failed: errno=EPERM(1): Operation not permitted
One single clean chown(nfsfile, -1, 0) call to NFSv3/4 file succeeds
on multiple kernels include 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.
Neither, I'm not sure about where the problem lies. Still checking.
Thanks for catching this!
--
xzhou
>
> Thank you.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer
Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports
Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper
Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-26 3:23 ` Xiong Zhou
@ 2014-09-26 12:36 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2014-09-28 2:53 ` Xiong Zhou
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Stanislav Kholmanskikh @ 2014-09-26 12:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xiong Zhou; +Cc: ltp-list
Hi!
On 09/26/2014 07:23 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>
>> To: "Xiong Zhou" <xzhou@redhat.com>
>> Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 8:07:26 PM
>> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 09/25/2014 11:17 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
>>>
>>> And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
>>> to "negative whence".
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> Patch 1 and patch 2 of the series are pushed.
>> Btw, patch 2 didn't apply to index correctly with 'git am', I had to
>> manually apply it.
>>
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience.. I should keep my master branch updated.
>
>> I'm experiencing difficulties with checking patch 3. In particular,
>> after applying your patch utime02 fails on NFSv4 with
>> 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64 kernel.
>
> Yes, I got the same results on 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6 kernel, v3 pass v4 fail.
>
>>
>> I'm not quite sure if it's a kernel problem or test case error. Still
>> investigating.
>>
>> Could you please check the test case in your RHEL 6 environment as well?
>
> I double checked that utime02 did pass on upstream 2.6.32 kernel
> both NFSv3 and NFSv4 in my env.
> On latest RHEL-6 kernel, both NFSv3 and NFSv4 passed utime02 test case.
>
> All failed test_output are just like:
> tst_tmpdir.c:158: chown(/nfsmnt/ltp-6L6Oqow6wv/utiMPq3y5, -1, 0) \
> failed: errno=EPERM(1): Operation not permitted
Sorry, I didn't get whether utime02+NFSv4 passed with the latest RHEL-6
kernel. Could you elaborate on this?
>
> One single clean chown(nfsfile, -1, 0) call to NFSv3/4 file succeeds
> on multiple kernels include 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.
>
> Neither, I'm not sure about where the problem lies. Still checking.
test.c:
#include <error.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
int main(void)
{
if (setuid(99)) {
perror("setuid() failed");
goto out;
}
if (mkdir("dir", 0700)) {
perror("mkdir() failed");
goto out;
}
if (chown("dir", -1, 0))
perror("chown() failed");
out:
return 0;
}
99 is 'nobody'.
With both upstream 2.6.32 and 2.6.32.63 `strace ./test` on a nfsv4 fs
will show:
setuid(99) = 0
mkdir("dir", 0700) = 0
chown("dir", 4294967295, 0) = 0
[root@ol6-x64 nfsv4]# ls -ld dir
drwx------ 2 nobody root 4096 Sep 26 13:14 dir
But with 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64:
setuid(99) = 0
mkdir("dir", 0700) = 0
chown("dir", 4294967295, 0) = -1 EPERM (Operation not permitted)
[root@ol6-x64 nfsv4]# ls -ld dir
drwx------ 2 nobody root 4096 Sep 26 13:19 dir
So, most likely, it's a bug in the vendor kernels.
So on I think that your patch may be pushed.
If there are no objections, I would like to do it on Monday.
Thanks.
>
> Thanks for catching this!
>
> --
> xzhou
>
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer
Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports
Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper
Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-26 12:36 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
@ 2014-09-28 2:53 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-29 8:28 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread
From: Xiong Zhou @ 2014-09-28 2:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stanislav Kholmanskikh; +Cc: ltp-list
Hi!
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>
> To: "Xiong Zhou" <xzhou@redhat.com>
> Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2014 8:36:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
>
> Hi!
>
> On 09/26/2014 07:23 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>
> >> To: "Xiong Zhou" <xzhou@redhat.com>
> >> Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 8:07:26 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
> >>
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> On 09/25/2014 11:17 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
> >>>
> >>> And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
> >>> to "negative whence".
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
> >>> ---
> >>
> >> Patch 1 and patch 2 of the series are pushed.
> >> Btw, patch 2 didn't apply to index correctly with 'git am', I had to
> >> manually apply it.
> >>
> >
> > Sorry for the inconvenience.. I should keep my master branch updated.
> >
> >> I'm experiencing difficulties with checking patch 3. In particular,
> >> after applying your patch utime02 fails on NFSv4 with
> >> 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64 kernel.
> >
> > Yes, I got the same results on 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6 kernel, v3 pass v4 fail.
> >
> >>
> >> I'm not quite sure if it's a kernel problem or test case error. Still
> >> investigating.
> >>
> >> Could you please check the test case in your RHEL 6 environment as well?
> >
> > I double checked that utime02 did pass on upstream 2.6.32 kernel
> > both NFSv3 and NFSv4 in my env.
> > On latest RHEL-6 kernel, both NFSv3 and NFSv4 passed utime02 test case.
> >
> > All failed test_output are just like:
> > tst_tmpdir.c:158: chown(/nfsmnt/ltp-6L6Oqow6wv/utiMPq3y5, -1, 0) \
> > failed: errno=EPERM(1): Operation not permitted
>
> Sorry, I didn't get whether utime02+NFSv4 passed with the latest RHEL-6
> kernel. Could you elaborate on this?
Sorry for the confusion. The latest kernel I have tested on was an internal
test temp build.
>
> >
> > One single clean chown(nfsfile, -1, 0) call to NFSv3/4 file succeeds
> > on multiple kernels include 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.
> >
> > Neither, I'm not sure about where the problem lies. Still checking.
>
> test.c:
>
> #include <error.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <sys/stat.h>
> #include <sys/types.h>
>
> int main(void)
> {
> if (setuid(99)) {
> perror("setuid() failed");
> goto out;
> }
>
> if (mkdir("dir", 0700)) {
> perror("mkdir() failed");
> goto out;
> }
>
> if (chown("dir", -1, 0))
> perror("chown() failed");
>
> out:
> return 0;
> }
>
> 99 is 'nobody'.
>
> With both upstream 2.6.32 and 2.6.32.63 `strace ./test` on a nfsv4 fs
> will show:
> setuid(99) = 0
> mkdir("dir", 0700) = 0
> chown("dir", 4294967295, 0) = 0
>
> [root@ol6-x64 nfsv4]# ls -ld dir
> drwx------ 2 nobody root 4096 Sep 26 13:14 dir
>
> But with 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64:
> setuid(99) = 0
> mkdir("dir", 0700) = 0
> chown("dir", 4294967295, 0) = -1 EPERM (Operation not permitted)
>
> [root@ol6-x64 nfsv4]# ls -ld dir
> drwx------ 2 nobody root 4096 Sep 26 13:19 dir
>
> So, most likely, it's a bug in the vendor kernels.
I agree, and I think it has been recorded already.
Thanks!
--
xzhou
>
> So on I think that your patch may be pushed.
>
> If there are no objections, I would like to do it on Monday.
>
> Thanks.
>
> >
> > Thanks for catching this!
> >
> > --
> > xzhou
> >
> >>
> >> Thank you.
> >>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer
Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports
Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper
Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
2014-09-28 2:53 ` Xiong Zhou
@ 2014-09-29 8:28 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Stanislav Kholmanskikh @ 2014-09-29 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xiong Zhou; +Cc: ltp-list
Hi!
Patch 3 was pushed.
Thank you.
On 09/28/2014 06:53 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
> Hi!
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>
>> To: "Xiong Zhou" <xzhou@redhat.com>
>> Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Sent: Friday, September 26, 2014 8:36:00 PM
>> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 09/26/2014 07:23 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>
>>>> To: "Xiong Zhou" <xzhou@redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 8:07:26 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up
>>>>
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> On 09/25/2014 11:17 AM, Xiong Zhou wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> And block3 description message fix from "mandatory locking"
>>>>> to "negative whence".
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Xiong Zhou <xzhou@redhat.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Patch 1 and patch 2 of the series are pushed.
>>>> Btw, patch 2 didn't apply to index correctly with 'git am', I had to
>>>> manually apply it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for the inconvenience.. I should keep my master branch updated.
>>>
>>>> I'm experiencing difficulties with checking patch 3. In particular,
>>>> after applying your patch utime02 fails on NFSv4 with
>>>> 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64 kernel.
>>>
>>> Yes, I got the same results on 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6 kernel, v3 pass v4 fail.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm not quite sure if it's a kernel problem or test case error. Still
>>>> investigating.
>>>>
>>>> Could you please check the test case in your RHEL 6 environment as well?
>>>
>>> I double checked that utime02 did pass on upstream 2.6.32 kernel
>>> both NFSv3 and NFSv4 in my env.
>>> On latest RHEL-6 kernel, both NFSv3 and NFSv4 passed utime02 test case.
>>>
>>> All failed test_output are just like:
>>> tst_tmpdir.c:158: chown(/nfsmnt/ltp-6L6Oqow6wv/utiMPq3y5, -1, 0) \
>>> failed: errno=EPERM(1): Operation not permitted
>>
>> Sorry, I didn't get whether utime02+NFSv4 passed with the latest RHEL-6
>> kernel. Could you elaborate on this?
>
> Sorry for the confusion. The latest kernel I have tested on was an internal
> test temp build.
>
>>
>>>
>>> One single clean chown(nfsfile, -1, 0) call to NFSv3/4 file succeeds
>>> on multiple kernels include 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.
>>>
>>> Neither, I'm not sure about where the problem lies. Still checking.
>>
>> test.c:
>>
>> #include <error.h>
>> #include <unistd.h>
>> #include <sys/stat.h>
>> #include <sys/types.h>
>>
>> int main(void)
>> {
>> if (setuid(99)) {
>> perror("setuid() failed");
>> goto out;
>> }
>>
>> if (mkdir("dir", 0700)) {
>> perror("mkdir() failed");
>> goto out;
>> }
>>
>> if (chown("dir", -1, 0))
>> perror("chown() failed");
>>
>> out:
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> 99 is 'nobody'.
>>
>> With both upstream 2.6.32 and 2.6.32.63 `strace ./test` on a nfsv4 fs
>> will show:
>> setuid(99) = 0
>> mkdir("dir", 0700) = 0
>> chown("dir", 4294967295, 0) = 0
>>
>> [root@ol6-x64 nfsv4]# ls -ld dir
>> drwx------ 2 nobody root 4096 Sep 26 13:14 dir
>>
>> But with 2.6.32-431.29.2.el6.x86_64:
>> setuid(99) = 0
>> mkdir("dir", 0700) = 0
>> chown("dir", 4294967295, 0) = -1 EPERM (Operation not permitted)
>>
>> [root@ol6-x64 nfsv4]# ls -ld dir
>> drwx------ 2 nobody root 4096 Sep 26 13:19 dir
>>
>> So, most likely, it's a bug in the vendor kernels.
>
> I agree, and I think it has been recorded already.
>
> Thanks!
> --
> xzhou
>>
>> So on I think that your patch may be pushed.
>>
>> If there are no objections, I would like to do it on Monday.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for catching this!
>>>
>>> --
>>> xzhou
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV. Videos for Nerds. Stuff that Matters.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=160591471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-09-29 8:29 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1397094487.31209591.1410431434756.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
2014-09-11 10:30 ` [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] fcntl14: dup code clean up Xiong Zhou
2014-09-11 14:04 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2014-09-19 6:46 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-23 11:52 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2014-09-19 6:47 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 " Xiong Zhou
2014-09-25 7:17 ` [LTP] [PATCH v3 " Xiong Zhou
2014-09-25 12:07 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2014-09-26 3:23 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-26 12:36 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2014-09-28 2:53 ` Xiong Zhou
2014-09-29 8:28 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
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.