From: Marius Kittler <mkittler@suse.de>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 0/2] Rewrite the gettid() testing suite
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2023 16:24:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <24951859.XGBpkceEbW@linux-9lzf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231005134911.26758-1-andrea.cervesato@suse.de>
Am Donnerstag, 5. Oktober 2023, 15:49:09 CEST schrieb Andrea Cervesato:
> From: Andrea Cervesato <andrea.cervesato@suse.com>
>
> Rewrite gettid01 and create a new gettid02 test in order to check all
> gettid() basic functionalities, according with its manual.
>
> Andrea Cervesato (2):
> Rewrite gettid01 test
> Add gettid02 test
>
> runtest/syscalls | 1 +
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/gettid/.gitignore | 1 +
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/gettid/Makefile | 4 +-
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/gettid/gettid01.c | 105 ++++----------------
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/gettid/gettid02.c | 68 +++++++++++++
> 5 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/gettid/gettid02.c
Looks generally good to merge.
I'm only wondering whether the goto in the 2nd test could be avoided. After
all it might even be a benefit to get an info for all the wrongly equivalent
thread IDs (and not just the first).
Then it would also make sense to use `int j = i + 1;` in the inner loop to
avoid duplicate/redundant commutative comparisons. And then you could actually
also drop the `i == j` check.
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-05 14:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-05 13:49 [LTP] [PATCH v2 0/2] Rewrite the gettid() testing suite Andrea Cervesato
2023-10-05 13:49 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] Rewrite gettid01 test Andrea Cervesato
2023-10-05 13:49 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] Add gettid02 test Andrea Cervesato
2023-10-05 14:24 ` Marius Kittler [this message]
2023-10-05 14:39 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 0/2] Rewrite the gettid() testing suite Andrea Cervesato via ltp
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=24951859.XGBpkceEbW@linux-9lzf \
--to=mkittler@suse.de \
--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.