[LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/removexattr02:skip the test if no xattr support

[LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/removexattr02:skip the test if no xattr support

[shuang.qiu]

From: Shuang Qiu <shuang.qiu@oracle.com>

Return TCONF if there is no xattr support in fs or mount without user_xattr option

Signed-off-by: Shuang Qiu <shuang.qiu@oracle.com>
---
 .../kernel/syscalls/removexattr/removexattr02.c    |    4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/removexattr/removexattr02.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/removexattr/removexattr02.c
index 58f310a..cea8733 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/removexattr/removexattr02.c
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/removexattr/removexattr02.c
@@ -85,6 +85,10 @@ static void verify_removexattr(struct test_case *tc)
 {
 
 	TEST(removexattr(tc->path, tc->name));
+	if (TEST_RETURN == -1 && TEST_ERRNO == ENOTSUP)
+		tst_brkm(TCONF, cleanup, "No xattr support in fs or "
+			 "mount without user_xattr option");
+
 	if (TEST_RETURN != -1) {
 		tst_resm(TFAIL, "removexattr() succeeded unexpectedly");
 		return;
-- 
1.7.9.5

[LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/removexattr02:skip the test if no xattr support

[Jan Stancek]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "shuang qiu" <shuang.qiu@oracle.com>
> To: ltp@lists.linux.it
> Sent: Friday, 24 June, 2016 5:36:02 AM
> Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/removexattr02:skip the test if no xattr	support
> 
> From: Shuang Qiu <shuang.qiu@oracle.com>
> 
> Return TCONF if there is no xattr support in fs or mount without user_xattr
> option

Why only in removexattr02? Should we do the same for removexattr01?

Regards,
Jan

[LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/removexattr02:skip the test if no xattr support

[Shuang Qiu]

On 06/24/2016 08:40 PM, Jan Stancek wrote:
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "shuang qiu" <shuang.qiu@oracle.com>
>> To: ltp@lists.linux.it
>> Sent: Friday, 24 June, 2016 5:36:02 AM
>> Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/removexattr02:skip the test if no xattr	support
>>
>> From: Shuang Qiu <shuang.qiu@oracle.com>
>>
>> Return TCONF if there is no xattr support in fs or mount without user_xattr
>> option
> Why only in removexattr02? Should we do the same for removexattr01?
removexattr01 already handle such situation.

Thanks
Shuang
>
> Regards,
> Jan

[LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/removexattr02:skip the test if no xattr support

[Jan Stancek]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shuang Qiu" <shuang.qiu@oracle.com>
> To: "Jan Stancek" <jstancek@redhat.com>
> Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
> Sent: Friday, 24 June, 2016 3:20:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/removexattr02:skip the test if no xattr support
> 
> On 06/24/2016 08:40 PM, Jan Stancek wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "shuang qiu" <shuang.qiu@oracle.com>
> >> To: ltp@lists.linux.it
> >> Sent: Friday, 24 June, 2016 5:36:02 AM
> >> Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/removexattr02:skip the test if no xattr
> >> 	support
> >>
> >> From: Shuang Qiu <shuang.qiu@oracle.com>
> >>
> >> Return TCONF if there is no xattr support in fs or mount without
> >> user_xattr
> >> option
> > Why only in removexattr02? Should we do the same for removexattr01?
> removexattr01 already handle such situation.

Sorry, I missed that. Pushed with curly brackets around if.

Regards,
Jan


> 
> Thanks
> Shuang
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jan
> 
>