[LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] clock_getres01: drop case which is passing NULL res parameter

[Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>]

----- Original Message -----
> Hi!
> > Since commit a9446a906f52 ("lib/vdso/32: Remove inconsistent NULL pointer
> > checks")
> > VDSO treats NULL parameter differently than in syscall.
> > 
> > Drop NULL parameter, subsequent patch will add test variants that test NULL
> > res parameter using syscall.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_getres/clock_getres01.c | 1 -
> >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_getres/clock_getres01.c
> > b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_getres/clock_getres01.c
> > index 15f32310839a..df3e84271ad9 100644
> > --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_getres/clock_getres01.c
> > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/clock_getres/clock_getres01.c
> > @@ -28,7 +28,6 @@ static struct test_case {
> >  	{"MONOTONIC", CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &res, 0, 0},
> >  	{"PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID", CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, &res, 0, 0},
> >  	{"THREAD_CPUTIME_ID", CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID, &res, 0, 0},
> > -	{"REALTIME", CLOCK_REALTIME, NULL, 0, 0},
> 
> Shouldn't we keep the REALTIME clock here and pass the &res here
> instead?

Test already has that as 1st entry in tcase array:
   {"REALTIME", CLOCK_REALTIME, &res, 0, 0},

> Can we please print which variant we are about to test from the test
> setup() as well?

Sure, I'll add that.