From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Vorel Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 14:24:15 +0200 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] msgget03: don't depend on existed shared resources In-Reply-To: <60FA81E4.3060709@fujitsu.com> References: <20210712075223.10682-1-aleksei.kodanev@bell-sw.com> <20210712075223.10682-2-aleksei.kodanev@bell-sw.com> <60FA81E4.3060709@fujitsu.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it Hi all, > Hi Cyril, Petr > > Hi! > >>> I think that we allready discussed this in another thread: > >>> https://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2021-July/023831.html > >> Thanks, I forgot this. In that case my approach (not using<=, but count > >> segments in /proc/sysvipc/shm before testing) might be more precise. > >> But no strong feeling about that, both solutions fix the test, let's chose one > >> and merge. > > As I said previously, there are many SysV IPC tests that do expect that > > nobody will add/remove IPC shm/queue/semaphores during the testrun and > > some of the testcases cannot even be implemented without this > > expectation. > > Hence I wouldn't complicate the test here and just count how many > > segments are there at the start and be done with it. > Agree. > A possible solution(alter get_used_queues api in new ipc lib and add > file parametrers, so we can use this api for msgget03) I have mentioned > in the previous email, the url as below: > https://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2021-July/023653.html LGTM. Or use /proc/sysvipc/shm instead of /proc/sysvipc/msg in get_used_queues() as you noted get_used_queues() has not been used yet. BTW searching where get_used_queues() appeared, I see [LTP] [PATCH v3 1/4] syscalls/ipc: add newipc library for new API [1], but if I'm not mistaken get_used_queues() was not used even there, maybe it was in some previous versions. Kind regards, Petr [1] https://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2016-December/003239.html