All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Bobrowski <mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH 2/4] syscalls/fanotify13: new test to verify FAN_REPORT_FID functionality
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 18:37:45 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190419083743.GA15974@lithium.mbobrowski.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxhQ_Yk9=085eN+TF6rX8CQhzdv7Ze+_Hp8t00CLL2k7+w@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 05:23:14PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:41 PM Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> > > Newly defined test file to validate the fanotify FAN_REPORT_FID
> > > functionality.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Bobrowski <mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/.gitignore   |   1 +
> > >  testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h   |  19 +-
> > >  testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify13.c | 329 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > This is missing the runtest entry in runtest/syscalls so that the test
> > is picked up by the testrunner.
> >
> > And the same bug slipped in during review for fanotify12 so I've
> > commited a fix that adds it there.
> >
> > ...
> >

My apologies, this was a simple oversight. I've gone ahead and updated it
accordingly.

> > > +static void do_test(unsigned int number)
> > > +{
> > > +     unsigned int i;
> > > +     int len, fds[ARRAY_SIZE(objects)];
> > > +
> > > +     struct file_handle *event_file_handle;
> > > +     struct fanotify_event_metadata *metadata;
> > > +     struct fanotify_event_info_fid *event_fid;
> > > +     struct test_case_t *tc = &test_cases[number];
> > > +     struct fanotify_mark_type *mark = &tc->mark;
> > > +
> > > +     tst_res(TINFO,
> > > +             "Test #%d: FAN_REPORT_FID with mark flag: %s",
> > > +             number, mark->name);
> > > +
> > > +     /* Gets the filesystem fsid and file handle for each object */
> > > +     get_object_stats(tc);
> >
> > Is there a reason why are are not calling this function once in the test
> > setup? It will be called for every test iteration when the test is
> > passed the -i option...
> >
> 
> I think that's an oversight. It could be called once during setup.

Indeed. I've changed this so that the function is now only called once from
within do_setup(). There was one code snippet (added below) that I had to move
out from get_object_stats() as there's a setup dependency for each test case.

--
event_set[i].expected_mask = tc->mask;
if (!objects[i].is_dir)
        event_set[i].expected_mask &= ~FAN_ONDIR;
--

I've added this snippet within setup_marks() as we're already iterating over
the objects array and passing in a task_struct_t object, which means we could
also setup the expected mask for each expected event there. Unless anyone
objects?

-- 
Matthew Bobrowski

  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-19  8:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-02 10:01 [LTP] [PATCH 0/4] fanotify: FAN_REPORT_FID and Directory Modification Events Matthew Bobrowski
2019-04-02 10:01 ` [LTP] [PATCH 1/4] syscalls/fanotify01: add FAN_REPORT_FID test cases Amir Goldstein
2019-04-15 15:18   ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-04-02 10:02 ` [LTP] [PATCH 2/4] syscalls/fanotify13: new test to verify FAN_REPORT_FID functionality Matthew Bobrowski
2019-04-16 13:41   ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-04-16 14:23     ` Amir Goldstein
2019-04-19  8:37       ` Matthew Bobrowski [this message]
2019-04-19  9:07         ` Amir Goldstein
2019-04-02 10:02 ` [LTP] [PATCH 3/4] syscalls/fanotify14: new test to validate FAN_REPORT_FID interface return values Matthew Bobrowski
2019-04-16 14:04   ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-04-19  8:38     ` Matthew Bobrowski
2019-04-02 10:02 ` [LTP] [PATCH 4/4] syscalls/fanotify15: verify fid for dirent events Matthew Bobrowski
2019-04-16 14:29   ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-04-16 14:59     ` Amir Goldstein
2019-04-16 15:00       ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-04-18 18:36         ` Amir Goldstein
2019-04-18 18:58           ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-04-18 19:10             ` Amir Goldstein
2019-04-18 19:42               ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-04-19  7:18                 ` Amir Goldstein

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190419083743.GA15974@lithium.mbobrowski.org \
    --to=mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.