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 16675E77188 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2025 12:47:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838323C1B47 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2025 13:47:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-3.smtp.seeweb.it (in-3.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::3]) (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 697253C0325 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2025 13:47:42 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-3.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-3.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9D761BD674C for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2025 13:47:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (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 1010F1F385; Wed, 8 Jan 2025 12:47:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1736340460; 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=tV/aWMh0t+lGdJezFkdU7SMR/JT4hQ5xIgtbDPcKsUo=; b=FRc5EVgBcxR25bJpTsk/VBNvMD85H+/B9S6qahr6DX7RKzcCpNLKWgRYMmi+tltZteZ1vQ RajQ8Te7GlplG6GhGEWmgmUsuCYkavzpNF4q3y1zA20pKFUpXx9ZqDCZK5nDuYH1vdFxmp bxeTNDFLzSoj1Z7K21umQqSL+CQpN7c= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1736340460; 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=tV/aWMh0t+lGdJezFkdU7SMR/JT4hQ5xIgtbDPcKsUo=; b=R1uQb1KggscLflGWT+gBxgCjpyHwaIShpZrBQS02Kh3EhP/lb+/b/8o29FssNqEzpay1zF nKQVvjqUo/Sb6NCQ== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=FRc5EVgB; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=R1uQb1Kg DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1736340460; 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=tV/aWMh0t+lGdJezFkdU7SMR/JT4hQ5xIgtbDPcKsUo=; b=FRc5EVgBcxR25bJpTsk/VBNvMD85H+/B9S6qahr6DX7RKzcCpNLKWgRYMmi+tltZteZ1vQ RajQ8Te7GlplG6GhGEWmgmUsuCYkavzpNF4q3y1zA20pKFUpXx9ZqDCZK5nDuYH1vdFxmp bxeTNDFLzSoj1Z7K21umQqSL+CQpN7c= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1736340460; 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=tV/aWMh0t+lGdJezFkdU7SMR/JT4hQ5xIgtbDPcKsUo=; b=R1uQb1KggscLflGWT+gBxgCjpyHwaIShpZrBQS02Kh3EhP/lb+/b/8o29FssNqEzpay1zF nKQVvjqUo/Sb6NCQ== Received: from imap1.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 imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6F9D1351A; Wed, 8 Jan 2025 12:47:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id 14HrNutzfmdDKAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Wed, 08 Jan 2025 12:47:39 +0000 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 13:47:34 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Cyril Hrubis Message-ID: <20250108124734.GB27248@pevik> References: <20250106-fix_setsid_tests-v2-0-c43f57a2bab6@suse.com> <20250106-fix_setsid_tests-v2-3-c43f57a2bab6@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1010F1F385 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.71 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[99.99%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.cz:dkim,suse.cz:replyto]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.cz:+] X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-3.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 03/11] Refactor ptem01 test 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 Andrea, Cyril, > Hi! > > + masterfd = SAFE_OPEN(MASTERCLONE, O_RDWR); > > + slavename = SAFE_PTSNAME(masterfd); > > - for (i = 0; i < NUMOPENS; ++i) { > > - masterfd[i] = open(MASTERCLONE, O_RDWR); > > - if (masterfd[i] < 0) { > > - tst_resm(TBROK, "%s", MASTERCLONE); > > - tst_resm(TBROK, "out of ptys"); > > - for (i = 0; i < NUMOPENS; ++i) { > > - if (masterfd[i] != 0) { > > - (void)close(masterfd[i]); > > - } > > - if (slavefd[i] != 0) { > > - (void)close(slavefd[i]); > > - } > > - } > > - tst_exit(); > > - } > > + TST_EXP_PASS(grantpt(masterfd)); > > + TST_EXP_PASS(unlockpt(masterfd)); > > - slavename = ptsname(masterfd[i]); > > - if (slavename == NULL) { > > - tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, NULL, > > - "ptsname() call failed"); > > - } > > + slavefd = SAFE_OPEN(slavename, O_RDWR); > This would be a bit better if done in setup() Good catch. If this fails, masterfd will be left unclosest (it would break on high -i). Also it speedup the test with high -i. I did not catch it because I thought it's better to close fd in case of repeated testing with -i, but obviously it should be perfectly safe to have open file descriptors shared during repeated testing. > > - if (grantpt(masterfd[i]) != 0) { > > - tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, NULL, > > - "grantpt() call failed"); > > - } > > + TST_EXP_POSITIVE(ioctl(slavefd, TCGETS, &termios)); > > + TST_EXP_POSITIVE(ioctl(slavefd, TCSETS, &termios)); > > + TST_EXP_POSITIVE(ioctl(slavefd, TCSETSW, &termios)); > > + TST_EXP_POSITIVE(ioctl(slavefd, TCSETSF, &termios)); > > + TST_EXP_POSITIVE(ioctl(slavefd, TCSETS, &termios)); > > + TST_EXP_POSITIVE(ioctl(slavefd, TCGETA, &termio)); > > + TST_EXP_POSITIVE(ioctl(slavefd, TCSETA, &termio)); > > + TST_EXP_POSITIVE(ioctl(slavefd, TCSETAW, &termio)); > > + TST_EXP_POSITIVE(ioctl(slavefd, TCSETAF, &termio)); > Are you sure these shouldn't be TST_EXP_PASS() instead? The original > code was doing != 0 for all of these. +1 Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp