|
From: Nicholas N. <nj...@ca...> - 2005-01-24 22:50:36
|
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Robert Walsh wrote: > I ran the two failing signal tests (corecheck/tests/sigkill and > none/tests/exec-sigmask) outside of Valgrind on my FC2 machine. The > results I got were the same as when I ran it under Valgrind. However, > the .exp files were different, so the tests were marked as failed. > Basically, signal 32 seems to be handled differently in both real life > and under Valgrind to how the .exp files expect it to be. Is it time to > update the .exp files, or is something else going on here? > > *** sigkill.stderr.exp 2005-01-19 22:01:41.043293766 -0800 > --- sigkill.stderr.out 2005-01-19 22:10:11.181185774 -0800 > *************** > *** 99,100 **** > ! setting signal 32: Success > ! getting signal 32: Success > --- 99,100 ---- > ! setting signal 32: Invalid argument > ! getting signal 32: Invalid argument > > > *** exec-sigmask.stdout.exp 2005-01-19 22:01:46.761629837 -0800 > --- exec-sigmask.stdout.out 2005-01-19 22:11:14.487860761 -0800 > *************** > *** 0 **** > --- 1 ---- > + full: signal 32 missing from mask That doesn't look that bad -- I think it's because V reserves a couple of signals. I think there may be some *.exp2 files for some of the other regtests that involve signals for exactly this reason... perhaps there should be some for these tests too. Or do they already have some? N |