From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:2959 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161019AbWARVxO (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:53:14 -0500 Subject: Re: new syscalls From: David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: <20060118133629.1cda96fd.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20060118133629.1cda96fd.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 08:53:07 +1100 Message-Id: <1137621188.30084.67.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: "Luck, Tony" , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, JANAK DESAI , Ulrich Drepper , David Howells , Davide Libenzi , Christoph Lameter List-ID: On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 13:36 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > That's an excellent point. > > Guys, architecture maintainers need test suites to verify that the syscalls > actually work as they wire them up. Please share. A stable URL would be > preferred - something which can go into the changlog or conceivably into > the kernel source. http://david.woodhou.se/sigmasking.c is a good one for testing sigsuspend after hooking up TIF_RESTORE_SIGMASK stuff and the generic sys_rt_sigsuspend(), although it's not actually my code. There were a bunch of other tests in a tarball with that (on linux-arch a year or two ago) which arch maintainers should also use occasionally when they play with signal or ptrace code. When I get back home I'll tidy up and publish the hacks I used for testing pselect() and ppoll() so that those can be tested without actually rebuilding glibc. -- dwmw2