From: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
To: Andrea Cervesato <andrea.cervesato@suse.com>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2] Add epoll_wait07 test
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 11:43:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87k03keenh.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221028090053.1662-1-andrea.cervesato@suse.com>
Hello,
Andrea Cervesato via ltp <ltp@lists.linux.it> writes:
> This test verifies EPOLLONESHOT functionality.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Cervesato <andrea.cervesato@suse.com>
> ---
> Make use of SAFE_EPOLL_* macros
> Listen to EPOLLIN event instead of EPOLLOUT
>
> .../kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore | 1 +
> .../kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait07.c | 78 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 79 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait07.c
>
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore
> index 8c5ed7c5c..66ac18ae2 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore
> @@ -4,3 +4,4 @@ epoll_wait03
> epoll_wait04
> epoll_wait05
> epoll_wait06
> +epoll_wait07
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait07.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait07.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000..9a492c148
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait07.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> +/*
> + * Copyright (C) 2022 SUSE LLC Andrea Cervesato <andrea.cervesato@suse.com>
> + */
> +
> +/*\
> + * [Description]
> + *
> + * Verify that EPOLLONESHOT is correctly handled by epoll_wait.
> + * We open a channel, write in it two times and verify that EPOLLIN has been
> + * received only once.
> + */
> +
> +#include <poll.h>
> +#include <sys/epoll.h>
> +#include "tst_test.h"
> +#include "tst_epoll.h"
> +
> +#define WRITE_SIZE 2048
> +
> +static int fds[2];
> +static int epfd;
> +
> +static void cleanup(void)
> +{
> + if (epfd > 0)
> + SAFE_CLOSE(epfd);
> +
> + if (fds[0] > 0)
> + SAFE_CLOSE(fds[0]);
> +
> + if (fds[1] > 0)
> + SAFE_CLOSE(fds[1]);
> +}
> +
> +static void run(void)
> +{
> + char buff[WRITE_SIZE];
> + struct epoll_event evt_receive;
> + struct epoll_event evt_request;
> +
> + SAFE_PIPE(fds);
> +
> + evt_request.events = EPOLLIN | EPOLLONESHOT;
> + evt_request.data.fd = fds[1];
I'm not sure why you set the data?
> +
> + epfd = SAFE_EPOLL_CREATE1(0);
> +
> + tst_res(TINFO, "Polling channel with EPOLLONESHOT");
> +
> + SAFE_EPOLL_CTL(epfd, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, fds[0], &evt_request);
> +
> + tst_res(TINFO, "Write on channel multiple times");
> +
> + memset(buff, 'a', WRITE_SIZE);
> + SAFE_WRITE(0, fds[1], buff, WRITE_SIZE);
> + SAFE_WRITE(0, fds[1], buff, WRITE_SIZE);
Why call write twice?
You don't read the data between waits and it is level triggered not edge
triggered.
> +
> + SAFE_EPOLL_WAIT(epfd, &evt_receive, 1, 2000);
> +
> + if ((evt_receive.events & EPOLLIN) == 0) {
> + tst_res(TFAIL, "No data received");
The chances of this failing are very close to zero, but if it does then
debugging will be difficult.
> + goto close;
> + }
> +
> + tst_res(TINFO, "Received first EPOLLIN event");
> +
> + TST_EXP_EQ_LI(epoll_wait(epfd, &evt_receive, 1, 0), 0);
> +
The test is valid AFAICT, but there is stuff which confuses it.
> +close:
> + SAFE_CLOSE(fds[0]);
> + SAFE_CLOSE(fds[1]);
> +}
> +
> +static struct tst_test test = {
> + .cleanup = cleanup,
> + .test_all = run,
> +};
> --
> 2.35.3
--
Thank you,
Richard.
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-24 12:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-28 9:00 [LTP] [PATCH v2] Add epoll_wait07 test Andrea Cervesato via ltp
2022-11-24 11:43 ` Richard Palethorpe [this message]
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=87k03keenh.fsf@suse.de \
--to=rpalethorpe@suse.de \
--cc=andrea.cervesato@suse.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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