Re: [LTP] Re: LTP Testcase Question - create_module02

[Paul L. <pl...@li...>]

On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 15:46, Robert Williamson wrote:
>=20
> Julie,
>=20
>   We can actually get by with changing the size to 0xffffffffffffffff,
> which works on both 32bit and 64bit archs....this should solve your
> potential problem.
>=20
> Dave,
>=20
>   Since this interface has become obsolete in 2.5, and already removed fr=
om
> the automatic run in the LTP's runalltests.sh script, I have no problem
> removing test #8 for ENOMEM.  One more question though, is their a
> conceivable case where the kernel could allocate a _contiguous_ block of =
16
> million terabytes (~0xffffffffffffffff) of memory, and cause the test to
> pass?
Not in the life foreseeable lifetime of this test.

> LTP users,
>=20
>   Any problems with/thoughts about me removing (commenting out) the ENOME=
M
> test (#8) in create_module02?
Unless it's a completely bogus test with no clear way to fix/work around
it then I'd say leave it.  I know a lot of people still run 2.4 so we
might support these for a while.  However I personally don't think this
set of tests should stay around forever since the module interface has
changed.

Does this fix the "potential problem" in question?  It would be nice if
more of this conversation had taken place on the mailing list.

-Paul Larson