From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stanislav Kholmanskikh Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 11:20:28 +0300 Subject: [LTP] [RFC] shell wrappers for tst_checkpoint In-Reply-To: <904217705.1759877.1464854305705.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <1464791693-10249-1-git-send-email-stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com> <904217705.1759877.1464854305705.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <574FEC4C.2000507@oracle.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it On 06/02/2016 10:58 AM, Jan Stancek wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Stanislav Kholmanskikh" >> To: ltp@lists.linux.it >> Cc: "vasily isaenko" >> Sent: Wednesday, 1 June, 2016 4:34:51 PM >> Subject: [LTP] [RFC] shell wrappers for tst_checkpoint >> >> Hi! >> >> There is a need to use the tst_checkpoint interface from shell, but >> we don't have wrappers for it (yet). >> >> Patch 1 of the series contains one possible implementation for that, >> patch 2 - an example of usage in the context of the memcg_functional test >> case. >> >> I'd like to get some feedback from LTP users. > > If we don't plan to support oldlib, we should document that shell > checkpoints will work only with newlib C testcases, since oldlib > currently doesn't use LTP_IPC_PATH and file has different layout > (there is no results struct). I'd better remove the old checkpoint api from LTP. There are ~20 C test cases using TST_CHECKPOINT_INIT(). It should be doable to convert them to using the new api, since it's likely that they are not "legacy" and don't require additional cleanup. :) Per my understanding, all new C test cases are expected to be written with the new api, so the only downside of this approach is that removing TST_CHECKPOINT_INIT() may require more time. > >> >> My primary concern is about two issues: >> >> 1. The new test API for C is cool and takes the responsibility on >> maintaining the infrastructure for tst_checkpoint. However, I couldn't >> find >> a way to implement something similar in shell, so I switched back to using >> two separate functions for that - TST_CHECKPOINT_SETUP, >> TST_CHECKPOINT_CLEANUP. >> >> There may be a better way... >> >> 2. What is the best location for the new supplemental binaries >> (tst_checkpoint_wait, >> tst_checkpoint_wake)? tools/apicmds/ltpapicmd.c or separate source files in >> testcases/lib/ (similar to tst_sleep)? >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> -- >> Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp >>