Re: [LTP] [PATCH] sched_getaffinity: fix possible fail in negative case

[Caspar Zhang <caspar@casparzhang.com>]

On 03/09/2012 03:19 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Mar 8, 2012, at 9:28 PM, Caspar Zhang wrote:
> 
>>
>> in negative case:
>>
>>    QUICK_TEST(sched_getaffinity(getpid()+1, len, mask));
>>
>> sometimes getpid()+1 will exist if there're other processes running.
>> This patch uses a different way to make sure the required pid doesn't
>> exist by forking a child and terminating it. The pid of the terminated
>> child will not be used for a short time and it's enough for the test to
>> continue.
> 
> 	pid_t is signed on FreeBSD and Linux, so it's safe to assume that a pid of -1 won't work. It all depends on what you're trying to achieve (the EINVAL or the ESRCH requirement).
> 	Testing to make sure that a pid isn't running via kill(pid, 0) is another semi-viable method, but it's also racy.
> Cheers,
> -Garrett

I'll keep your test case and remove the getpid()+1 one.

Thanks,
Caspar

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing 
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list