From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] fix rpc_suite/rpc:add check returned value
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 09:59:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YNBGza7f7dOawiaF@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210617070806.174220-1-dongshijiang@inspur.com>
Hi all,
[Cc libtirpc ML and Steve]
> "Segmentation fault (core dumped)" due to the failure of svcfd_create during the rpc test, so you need to check the return value of the "svcfd_create" function
I'm not sure what is the value of TI-RPC tests. IMHO really messy code does
not in the end cover much of libtirpc functionality. That's why I'm thinking
to propose deleting whole testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/. libtirpc is being
used in nfs-utils, thus it'd deserve to have some testing, but IMHO this
should be libtirpc.
I'm not planning to dive into the technology to understand it enough be
able to written the tests from scratch and I'm not aware of anybody else
planning it.
> Signed-off-by: dongshijiang <dongshijiang@inspur.com>
> ---
> .../rpc/rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy.c | 5 +++++
> .../rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy_stress.c | 5 +++++
> .../rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_register/rpc_xprt_register.c | 5 +++++
> .../rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_unregister/rpc_xprt_unregister.c | 5 +++++
> 4 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
> diff --git a/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy.c b/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy.c
> index 60b96cec3..3557c0068 100644
> --- a/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy.c
> +++ b/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy.c
> @@ -46,6 +46,11 @@ int main(void)
> //First of all, create a server
> svcr = svcfd_create(fd, 0, 0);
> +
> + //check returned value
> + if ((SVCXPRT *) svcr == NULL) {
> + return test_status;
> + }
> //Then call destroy macro
> svc_destroy(svcr);
> diff --git a/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy_stress.c b/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy_stress.c
> index ecd145393..5a4331f4d 100644
> --- a/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy_stress.c
> +++ b/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_createdestroy_svc_destroy/rpc_svc_destroy_stress.c
> @@ -55,6 +55,11 @@ int main(int argn, char *argc[])
> //First of all, create a server
> for (i = 0; i < nbCall; i++) {
> svcr = svcfd_create(fd, 0, 0);
> +
> + //check returned value
> + if ((SVCXPRT *) svcr == NULL)
> + continue;
> + svcr = NULL;
man svc_destroy(3) states that it deallocates private data structures, including
xprt itself.
Kind regards,
Petr
> //Then call destroy macro
> svc_destroy(svcr);
> diff --git a/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_register/rpc_xprt_register.c b/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_register/rpc_xprt_register.c
> index da3b93022..de4df15f1 100644
> --- a/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_register/rpc_xprt_register.c
> +++ b/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_register/rpc_xprt_register.c
> @@ -48,6 +48,11 @@ int main(void)
> //create a server
> svcr = svcfd_create(fd, 1024, 1024);
> +
> + //check returned value
> + if ((SVCXPRT *) svcr == NULL) {
> + return test_status;
> + }
> //call routine
> xprt_register(svcr);
> diff --git a/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_unregister/rpc_xprt_unregister.c b/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_unregister/rpc_xprt_unregister.c
> index d0b7a20d4..fbaec25ad 100644
> --- a/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_unregister/rpc_xprt_unregister.c
> +++ b/testcases/network/rpc/rpc-tirpc/tests_pack/rpc_suite/rpc/rpc_regunreg_xprt_unregister/rpc_xprt_unregister.c
> @@ -52,6 +52,11 @@ int main(int argn, char *argc[])
> //create a server
> svcr = svcfd_create(fd, 1024, 1024);
> +
> + //check returned value
> + if ((SVCXPRT *) svcr == NULL) {
> + return test_status;
> + }
> xprt_register(svcr);
> //call routine
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-21 7:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-17 7:08 [LTP] [PATCH] fix rpc_suite/rpc:add check returned value dongshijiang
2021-06-21 7:59 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2021-06-24 18:32 ` Petr Vorel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-06-21 9:11 James Dong =?unknown-8bit?b?6JGj5LiW5rGf?=
2021-06-23 16:06 ` Petr Vorel
2021-06-24 1:02 James Dong =?unknown-8bit?b?6JGj5LiW5rGf?=
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=YNBGza7f7dOawiaF@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--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