From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1XMEQF-00033i-NH for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 10:56:19 +0000 Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 12:55:16 +0200 From: chrubis@suse.cz Message-ID: <20140826105516.GA28025@rei> References: <0be2f82a131d32b119748e91a840cb038bf82960.1409046964.git.jstancek@redhat.com> <20140826100642.GA27928@rei> <1144259951.13045166.1409048187591.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1144259951.13045166.1409048187591.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] tst_ncpus_max: use kernel_max if available List-Id: Linux Test Project General Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-list-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Jan Stancek Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net Hi! > These two are still open / under discussion: > [PATCH] sbrk02: check for ret code in setup() > [PATCH] mmap15: don't fail if mmap returns EINVAL > > mmap15 looks like old issue, so it could wait after release. Agreed. > sbrk02 can loop indefinitely in setup(), which is worse IMO. Ok. So the issue there is that sbrk() does not fail in setup() because the increment overflows. Does it work if we stop increasing the increment before that happen? Or does sbrk() fails to fail there? -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters. http://tv.slashdot.org/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list