Re: [LTP] [PATCH][ppoll01] fix testcase 1, 5: pass correct valuefor sigset_t for mips

[Henry Y. <hy...@mv...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Subrata Modak [mailto:su...@li...]
> Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 9:40 AM
> To: Henry Yei
> Cc: Garrett Cooper; LTP Mailing List
> Subject: RE: [LTP] [PATCH][ppoll01] fix testcase 1, 5: pass correct
> valuefor sigset_t for mips
> 
> On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 14:09 -0800, Henry Yei wrote:
> > Subrata,
> >
> > I've included Nicolas Joly's suggested removal of progdir to force
> the test to create all test files in the temp directory in the attached
> patch.
> >
> > I'm not sure why tst_exit() is needed when calling cleanup(), as it
> would be called by cleanup(). I can add it back, if needed. Any other
> comments on the the appropriateness of "sizeof(sigmask)" would also be
> welcomed. There are a few other tests with similar issues.
> >
> 
> Henry,
> 
> Probably because of heavy changes recently, this patch is not applying
> properly. Can you please rebase your changes:
> 
> patching file testcases/kernel/syscalls/ppoll/ppoll01.c
> Hunk #3 FAILED at 98.
> Hunk #4 FAILED at 127.
> Hunk #5 FAILED at 185.
> Hunk #6 FAILED at 252.
> 4 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/ppoll/ppoll01.c.rej
> 
> Regards--
> Subrata
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Subrata Modak [mailto:su...@li...]
> > > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 5:59 AM
> > > To: Henry Yei
> > > Cc: Garrett Cooper; LTP Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH][ppoll01] fix testcase 1, 5: pass correct
> > > valuefor sigset_t for mips
> > >
> > > Any further work on this patch ?
> > >
> > > Regards--
> > > Subrata
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 12:08 -0700, Henry Yei wrote:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Garrett Cooper [mailto:yan...@gm...]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 7:57 PM
> > > > > To: Henry Yei
> > > > > Cc: LTP Mailing List
> > > > > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH][ppoll01] fix testcase 1, 5: pass
> correct
> > > > > value for sigset_t for mips
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Henry Yei <hy...@mv...>
> wrote:
> > > > > > All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The patch attached  for ppoll01:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > cleans up spacing and code style
> > > > > >
> > > > > > removes unneeded/broken debug option parsing
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if test fails, it prints out the last failed errno, rather
> than
> > > just
> > > > > the
> > > > > > last errno(which may have been successful)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > passes in correct size of sigset_t for mips
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off by: Henry Yei <hy...@mv...>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This patch was tested/passed on x86, mips(little endian), and
> > > > > ppc_82xx .
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Please keep tst_exit() at the bottom.
> > > > > 2. Why can't we do sizeof(sigsetmask) ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > -Garrett
> > > >
> > > > Garrett,
> > > >
> > > > You want me to put tst_exit() at the bottom, even though it is
> called
> > > within cleanup()?
> > > > You mean sizeof(sigmask) ~ sizeof(sigset_t), right? That code was
> > > commented out since version 1.1 which I thought was odd too, so I
> did
> > > check sizeof(sigmask).
> > > > However, sizeof(sigmask) on mips returns 128 which does not seem
> > > correct. I haven't checked the other architectures, but I suspect
> some
> > > might have a similar mismatch. Apparently sigset_t may have
> different
> > > values when returned from glibc vs kernel space. More information
> from
> > > this post:
> > > >
> > > > http://lists.uclibc.org/pipermail/uclibc/2009-January/041850.html


Subrata,

I've included the ppoll01 patch which should apply cleanly to the latest in CVS.