Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] selftests: pidfd: add tests for PIDFD_SELF_*

[Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>]

On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 01:37:06PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 10/17/24 11:38, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 10:37:00AM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> > > On 10/17/24 10:28 AM, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 10:17:54AM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> > > > > On 10/17/24 5:06 AM, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > > > 	#ifndef __TOOLS_LINUX_PIDFD_H
> > > > > > 	#define __TOOLS_LINUX_PIDFD_H
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 	/*
> > > > > > 	 * Some systems have issues with the linux/fcntl.h import in linux/pidfd.h, so
> > > > > > 	 * work around this by setting the header guard.
> > > > > > 	 */
> > > > > > 	#define _LINUX_FCNTL_H
> > > > > > 	#include "../../../include/uapi/linux/pidfd.h"
> > > > > > 	#undef _LINUX_FCNTL_H
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 	#endif /* __TOOLS_LINUX_PIDFD_H */
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Then the test code needs only to update the pidfd.h file to #include
> > > > > > <linux/pidfd.h> and add a simple $(TOOLS_INCLUDES) to the CFLAGS += line in
> > > > > > the pidfd self tests Makefile and we should be all good.
> > > > >
>
> I like this solution. I should have read this message first before
> handling the others.

Thanks!

>
> > > > > Yes.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That way we always import everything in this header correctly, we directly
> > > > > > document this issue, we include the header as you would in userland and we
> > > > > > should cover off all the issues?
> > > > >
> > > > > Very nice!
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > I saw from your other thread the idea was to take snapshots and to run scripts
> > > > to compare etc. but I suppose putting this into the known-stub directory
> > >
> > > Actually, I'm not running scripts, because the only time things need to
> > > change is when new selftests require a new include, or when something
> > > changes that selftests depend on.
> > >
> > > > tools/include/linux rather than tools/include/uapi/linux would avoid a conflict
> > > > here.
> > >
> > > This is the first time I've actually looked at tools/include/linux. That
> > > sounds about right, though.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Or would you say the wrapper should regardless be in the uapi/linux directory?
> > > >
> > >
> > > No, not if there is already a better location, as you pointed out.
> >
> > OK perfect, I have a patch series ready to go with this (and addressing
> > Christian's comments).
> >
> > Shuah - if you are open to this approach then we should be good to go!
>
> I am caught up with the discussion now. I am good with this change.
>
> Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>

Perfect thanks very much, I will send out the new version of the series with
this applied, much appreciated! :)

>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
>