[PATCH v3] tests/fcntl.c: add test for struct f_owner_ex

[Zhibin Li]

On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Zhibin Li <08826794brmt at gmail.com> wrote:

> ---
>  tests/fcntl.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 41 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tests/fcntl.c b/tests/fcntl.c
> index 4f62ca2a..606f63bd 100644
> --- a/tests/fcntl.c
> +++ b/tests/fcntl.c
> @@ -69,12 +69,53 @@ test_flock64(void)
>  #endif
>  }
>
> +static long
> +test_f_owner_ex_type_pid(const int cmd, const char *const cmd_name,
> +                        const int type, const char *const type_name,
> +                        const pid_t pid)
> +{
> +       struct f_owner_ex fo = { .type = type, .pid = pid };
> +
> +       long rc = invoke_test_syscall(cmd, &fo);
> +       printf("%s(0, %s, {type=%s, pid=%d}) = %s\n",
> +              TEST_SYSCALL_STR, cmd_name, type_name, pid, sprintrc(rc));
> +       return rc;
> +}
> +
> +static void
> +is_esrch_test_f_owner_ex(const int type, const char *const type_name,
> +                        pid_t pid, bool is_esrch)
> +{
> +       if (is_esrch) {
> +               test_f_owner_ex_type_pid(ARG_STR(F_SETOWN_EX),
> +                                        type, type_name, pid);
> +       } else {
> +               if (test_f_owner_ex_type_pid(ARG_STR(F_SETOWN_EX),
> +                                            type, type_name, pid))
> +                       return;
> +               test_f_owner_ex_type_pid(ARG_STR(F_GETOWN_EX),
> +

                                type, type_name, pid);
> +       }
> +}
>
According to Dmitry's advice, I use this function instead of a piece of
duplicate code.

> +
> +static void
> +test_f_owner_ex(void)
> +{
> +       is_esrch_test_f_owner_ex(ARG_STR(F_OWNER_TID), 1234567890, true);
> +       is_esrch_test_f_owner_ex(ARG_STR(F_OWNER_PID), 1298126790, true);
> +       is_esrch_test_f_owner_ex(ARG_STR(F_OWNER_PGRP), 1294567890, true);
> +       is_esrch_test_f_owner_ex(ARG_STR(F_OWNER_TID), 20, false);
> +       is_esrch_test_f_owner_ex(ARG_STR(F_OWNER_PID), 30, false);
> +       is_esrch_test_f_owner_ex(ARG_STR(F_OWNER_PGRP), 40, false);
>
Since the function  is_esrch_test_f_owner_ex is called many
times(duplication?), I don't know whether
it would be better to user a macro now such as:

define IS_ESRCH_TEST_F_OWNER_EX_ESRCH(cmd)
is_esrch_test_f_owner_ex_esrch(cmd, #cmd)

Beside, I want to to know how to locate indentation problems(or similar
things) before I send patches?
I did find something in README-hacking but when I use this:

git -c core.whitespace=space-before-tab,trailing-space diff-index \
--check 4b825dc642cb6eb9a060e54bf8d69288fbee4904

I didn't find the indentation problems in my former patch(v2) so I guess
I'm getting into the wrong direction.
Anyone can help?

> +}
> +
>  int
>  main(void)
>  {
>         create_sample();
>         test_flock();
>         test_flock64();
> +       test_f_owner_ex();
>
>         puts("+++ exited with 0 +++");
>         return 0;
> --
> 2.14.3
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.strace.io/pipermail/strace-devel/attachments/20180329/525153c8/attachment.html>