From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06D8CC4332F for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 13:14:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DDB73CC516 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 14:13:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (in-5.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F247E3CC504 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 14:13:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 694EB6008EC for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 14:13:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F78021AE3; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 13:13:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1669814028; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=QMqIMLvz3+1l+FhDkrIpIZ34xCRF5AmmrJ0G8Ay79b4=; b=BkGqteraa4cRVx9Vit1biRWt74Nhuj9vNZQEZ5mWsu2OiL42FsKicZUsdRjBdhwKIIuaSe nMSuROLcaXc3l6z3Q1g455lcUO4f4NFwysxtanxqSyB+0K1V5elcEtrFOsYih0jB4rdnkK AGd3MVoOC1mdPhcjJ2X0fM13kasaF1k= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1669814028; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=QMqIMLvz3+1l+FhDkrIpIZ34xCRF5AmmrJ0G8Ay79b4=; b=B5r6ClmS0SNnC2EROWKNHAisnmzJ1wzPmX0JUSYJ7wlz5TyZB8N2gKyHJiFqvjLSwyvygq ojmRzC6HDPJu11BQ== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E66F1331F; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 13:13:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id b4SVCAxXh2PZVgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Wed, 30 Nov 2022 13:13:48 +0000 Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 14:15:06 +0100 From: Cyril Hrubis To: Teo Couprie Diaz Message-ID: References: <20221128091508.75414-1-teo.coupriediaz@arm.com> <448cb776-770d-3235-c0d9-3c9005663790@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <448cb776-770d-3235-c0d9-3c9005663790@arm.com> X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-5.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [RFC PATCH 0/1] brk: use direct syscalls X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi! > >> WDYT about .test_variants? In that case it'd be tested also on musl > >> or any platform where it's implemented. > > I would got for it, that way we would test both the kernel implemntation > > and that libc does something sensible, e.g. returns error. > > > I'm still quite new to LTP, so I might be understanding things wrong. > > My understanding of your conversation is that you're suggesting using > the .test_variants to have one version of the tests going through the > libc wrappers as usual, eventually skipping the test with TCONF if the > libc wrapper does not implement the syscall, and one version which would > be the the direct syscall I am suggesting in this patch. > > Would that be correct ? If so it does make sense to me, I could try > implementing that. Yes, exactly this. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp