From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 15:48:25 +0800
Subject: [LTP] Add new test for pipe2 with/without O_NONBLOCK mode
In-Reply-To: <CAEemH2dzt4Hi7HDyO4Spn_i3naJbhQ5GwpZVCk3BgkdaL5uNWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200409211255.1357-1-laniel_francis@privacyrequired.com>
 <7c9e27de-aaff-98ea-4e00-2c242f7a0cc3@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <f8f3aea3-5371-a8b5-09dd-1200d9dc6d72@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <CAEemH2dzt4Hi7HDyO4Spn_i3naJbhQ5GwpZVCk3BgkdaL5uNWg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c4118b86-b364-1355-3bf4-602a9ae0c5bc@cn.fujitsu.com>
List-Id: <ltp.lists.linux.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: ltp@lists.linux.it

Hi Li


> Hi Xu,
> 
> Thanks for reviewing the patches.
> 
> Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com 
> <mailto:xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>> wrote:
> 
>     ...
>      > I modify your patch and merged into my ltp own fork.
>      > see
>      >
>     https://github.com/xuyang0410/ltp/commits/Laniel_francis_pipe2_03_v3.fixes
>      >
>      > ps: I will convert pipe2_01/02.c into new libray and use
>     SAFE_PIPE2 macro.
>     Can you merge the safe_pipe2 patch(don't need to add this macro into
>     old
>     safe_macro header) into master? so then I can write new test cases
> 
> 
> I'm ok with only support it in the new library.
> 
> But if we export the safe macro only to use by new API, we'd better add 
> it into lib/tst_safe_macros.c
> but not lib/safe_macros.c, this patch leaves the 'void (*cleanup_fn) 
> (void)'?hook in function safe_pipe2()
> and put in safe_macros.c that is compatible?with both API using.
> 
> Do you think so? if yes I can help to move it to?tst_safe_macros.c and 
> apply it.
Yes. I only noticed header file place and forgot C file place.
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Li Wang