From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61243C47DD9 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 13:28:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BB3C3D0347 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:28:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (in-2.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F4B93C86E2 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:27:58 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-2.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2; helo=smtp-out2.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 510F4600F3C for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:27:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org [10.150.64.98]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 188AE1F7BD; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 13:27:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1709126875; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=g0jhopSJdZFHXD9FaGbFY856aCCzzMLaoB22zg6LI2w=; b=wzDpw9M845iB25cl4v0OKDWTQgsnfCM2pMnpv+JhWDqitSlr/aoQgvlJWu6ILyT4ivncnA vWAz6PbHRsGPyuTw5jQjS0Glpq1aI5+5i6/EZlz5714wq92soN/s7g6aE71zhq02dXiY2D O7wcI4Qn2tWvTKGEo+Ym9Mln1fgIRew= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1709126875; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=g0jhopSJdZFHXD9FaGbFY856aCCzzMLaoB22zg6LI2w=; b=BrXFeZDRA6XuMpEc+H5A/ifYCi2mQ8lx7xAux6JxThIQeGyXXX5CL4Lq5G/0oPqYQDmjG1 5kYJugS48TcPbGCg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1709126875; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=g0jhopSJdZFHXD9FaGbFY856aCCzzMLaoB22zg6LI2w=; b=wzDpw9M845iB25cl4v0OKDWTQgsnfCM2pMnpv+JhWDqitSlr/aoQgvlJWu6ILyT4ivncnA vWAz6PbHRsGPyuTw5jQjS0Glpq1aI5+5i6/EZlz5714wq92soN/s7g6aE71zhq02dXiY2D O7wcI4Qn2tWvTKGEo+Ym9Mln1fgIRew= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1709126875; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=g0jhopSJdZFHXD9FaGbFY856aCCzzMLaoB22zg6LI2w=; b=BrXFeZDRA6XuMpEc+H5A/ifYCi2mQ8lx7xAux6JxThIQeGyXXX5CL4Lq5G/0oPqYQDmjG1 5kYJugS48TcPbGCg== Received: from imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EEAF134FB; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 13:27:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([10.150.64.162]) by imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id hdZgA9s032XhCAAAn2gu4w (envelope-from ); Wed, 28 Feb 2024 13:27:55 +0000 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:27:45 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: "Yang Xu (Fujitsu)" Message-ID: <20240228132745.GA1602633@pevik> References: <20240226135336.19733-1-xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com> <20240226135336.19733-6-xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com> <20240228072413.GB1581418@pevik> <965fe6c7-118f-4c76-b7f8-a83308cdd54c@fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <965fe6c7-118f-4c76-b7f8-a83308cdd54c@fujitsu.com> Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.66 / 50.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.cz:email]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; BAYES_HAM(-0.04)[57.93%] X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-2.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v5 6/7] syscalls/swapon03: Simply this case X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: "ltp@lists.linux.it" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi Yang Xu, > Hi Petr > > Hi Yang Xu, > >> By moving swapfile create stage from verify_swaopon and > >> test EPERM error more accurate. Also use glibc wrapper by > >> using swapon/swapoff instead of call syscall number directly > >> because glibc/musl/binoic also support them since long time ago. > > s/binoic/bionic/ > > Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel > Thanks for your nice review. Sorry, when your review v4 patch, I don't > solve all comment in v5. So I did it in my own ltp fork branch named as > v5_max_swapfiles[1](such as swapfiles => swap file, snprint return > value, else branch....). > ps: Only the 6th patch was modified, other patches aren't modified. If > you see no problem, I plan to merge this patchset today. [2] looks good to me, please merge. Very nit (feel free to ignore): snprintf(cmd_buffer, ...) is too long, renaming cmd_buffer just to buf would shorten whole line. Kind regards, Petr > [1]https://github.com/xuyang0410/ltp/commits/v5_max_swapfiles/ [2] https://github.com/xuyang0410/ltp/commit/9e83b1fb1d8f8631122c70a336aacd28f94d8343 > Best Regards > Yang Xu > > Kind regards, > > Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp