From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Stancek Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 03:58:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [LTP] [RFC] shell wrappers for tst_checkpoint In-Reply-To: <1464791693-10249-1-git-send-email-stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com> References: <1464791693-10249-1-git-send-email-stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com> Message-ID: <904217705.1759877.1464854305705.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it ----- 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). > > 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 >