From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Wei Gao <wegao@suse.com>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v4 1/2] ptrace05: Refactor the test using new LTP API
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 14:39:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250108133920.GA30914@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241217061636.16366-2-wegao@suse.com>
Hi Wei,
Generally LGTM, with few mostly formatting notes below.
Thanks!
Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/ptrace05.c
...
> +/*\
> + * [Description]
> *
> - * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along
> - * with this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
> - * 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA.
> + * This test ptraces itself as per arbitrarily specified signals,
> + * over 0 to SIGRTMAX range.
> *
nit: could you please pay a bit of attention to the blank lines like this one?
It's also in print_dbg_sig() and test_signal().
> - ******************************************************************************
> */
> -int usage(const char *);
> -
> -int usage(const char *argv0)
> +static void print_dbg_sig(int signum)
> {
> - fprintf(stderr, "usage: %s [start-signum] [end-signum]\n", argv0);
> - return 1;
> +
> + char const *strsig = tst_strsig(signum);
> +
> + if (strstr(strsig, "???")) {
> + tst_res(TDEBUG, "[child] Sending kill(.., %d)",
> + signum);
> + } else {
> + tst_res(TDEBUG, "[child] Sending kill(.., %s)",
> + strsig);
nit: this could be in a single line (below 80 or 90 chars), thus without {}
(readability).
static void print_dbg_sig(int signum)
{
char const *strsig = tst_strsig(signum);
if (strstr(strsig, "???"))
tst_res(TDEBUG, "[child] Sending kill(.., %d)", signum);
else
tst_res(TDEBUG, "[child] Sending kill(.., %s)", strsig);
}
> + }
> }
> -int main(int argc, char **argv)
> +static void test_signal(int signum)
> {
> - int end_signum = -1;
> - int signum;
> - int start_signum = -1;
> int status;
> -
> pid_t child;
> - tst_parse_opts(argc, argv, NULL, NULL);
> + child = SAFE_FORK();
> +
> + if (!child) {
> + TST_EXP_PASS_SILENT(ptrace(PTRACE_TRACEME, 0, NULL, NULL));
> - if (start_signum == -1) {
> - start_signum = 0;
> + print_dbg_sig(signum);
> + SAFE_KILL(getpid(), signum);
> + exit(0);
> }
> - if (end_signum == -1) {
> - end_signum = SIGRTMAX;
> +
> + SAFE_WAITPID(child, &status, 0);
> +
> + switch (signum) {
> + case 0:
> + if (WIFEXITED(status)
> + && WEXITSTATUS(status) == 0) {
> + tst_res(TPASS,
> + "kill(.., 0) exited with 0, as expected.");
> + } else {
> + tst_res(TFAIL,
> + "kill(.., 0) exited with unexpected %s.", tst_strstatus(status));
> + }
> + break;
> + case SIGKILL:
> + if (WIFSIGNALED(status) && WTERMSIG(status) == SIGKILL)
> + tst_res(TPASS, "Child killed by SIGKILL");
> + else
> + tst_res(TFAIL, "Child %s", tst_strstatus(status));
> + break;
> + /* All other processes should be stopped. */
> + default:
> + if (WIFSTOPPED(status))
> + tst_res(TDEBUG, "Stopped as expected");
> + else {
nit: if else uses { }, if should use them as well.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html#placing-braces-and-spaces
This does not apply if only one branch of a conditional statement is a single
statement; in the latter case use braces in both branches
> + tst_res(TFAIL, "Didn't stop as expected. Child %s", tst_strstatus(status));
> + expect_stop++;
> + }
> + break;
> }
...
> + if (expect_stop == 0)
nit: if (!expect_stop)
> + tst_res(TPASS, "Stopped as expected");
> + else
> + tst_res(TFAIL, "Didn't stop as expected, total %d cases failed", expect_stop);
> }
We don't need another TFAIL it just repeats another TFAIL.
IMHO also TPASS should not be needed (we always get TPASS/TFAIL result for
signum == 0), but it does not harm.
Kind regards,
Petr
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-08 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-25 11:22 [LTP] [PATCH v1 0/2] ptrace: Refactor Wei Gao via ltp
2023-09-25 11:22 ` [LTP] [PATCH v1 1/2] ptrace05: Refactor the test using new LTP API Wei Gao via ltp
2023-11-28 8:57 ` Richard Palethorpe
2023-11-28 9:24 ` Petr Vorel
2023-09-25 11:22 ` [LTP] [PATCH v1 2/2] ptrace06: " Wei Gao via ltp
2023-11-28 9:31 ` Richard Palethorpe
2023-11-28 9:51 ` Petr Vorel
2023-12-01 1:06 ` Wei Gao via ltp
2023-12-01 0:59 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 0/2] ptrace: Refactor Wei Gao via ltp
2023-12-01 0:59 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] ptrace05: Refactor the test using new LTP API Wei Gao via ltp
2024-02-08 16:15 ` Andrea Cervesato via ltp
2023-12-01 0:59 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] ptrace06: " Wei Gao via ltp
2024-02-08 16:25 ` Andrea Cervesato via ltp
2024-06-03 10:35 ` [LTP] [PATCH v3 0/2] ptrace: Refactor Wei Gao via ltp
2024-06-03 10:35 ` [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/2] ptrace05: Refactor the test using new LTP API Wei Gao via ltp
2024-06-28 15:35 ` Cyril Hrubis
2024-06-03 10:35 ` [LTP] [PATCH v3 2/2] ptrace06: " Wei Gao via ltp
2024-06-28 16:15 ` Cyril Hrubis
2024-12-17 6:16 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 0/2] ptrace: Refactor Wei Gao via ltp
2024-12-17 6:16 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 1/2] ptrace05: Refactor the test using new LTP API Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-08 13:39 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2024-12-17 6:16 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 2/2] ptrace06: " Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-09 8:55 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-13 8:16 ` [LTP] [PATCH v5 0/2] ptrace: Refactor Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-13 8:16 ` [LTP] [PATCH v5 1/2] ptrace05: Refactor the test using new LTP API Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-13 16:02 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-13 21:40 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-14 9:25 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-13 8:16 ` [LTP] [PATCH v5 2/2] ptrace06: " Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-14 12:40 ` [LTP] [PATCH v6 0/2] ptrace: Refactor Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-14 12:40 ` [LTP] [PATCH v6 1/2] ptrace05: Refactor the test using new LTP API Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-14 13:05 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-14 12:40 ` [LTP] [PATCH v6 2/2] ptrace06: " Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-14 14:32 ` [LTP] [PATCH v7 0/2] ptrace: Refactor Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-14 14:32 ` [LTP] [PATCH v7 1/2] ptrace05: Refactor the test using new LTP API Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-16 16:44 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-14 14:32 ` [LTP] [PATCH v7 2/2] ptrace06: " Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-16 16:50 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-17 10:40 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-17 10:42 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-17 11:12 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-20 4:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH v8 0/2] ptrace: Refactor Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-20 4:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH v8 1/2] ptrace06: Refactor the test using new LTP API Wei Gao via ltp
2025-01-20 13:35 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-20 4:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH v8 2/2] ptrace06_child.c: Remove unused ptrace06_child.c Wei Gao via ltp
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250108133920.GA30914@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=wegao@suse.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox