[PATCH v7 4/4] tests: check status qualifier

[Paul Chaignon]

On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 08:06:06PM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 05:31:26PM +0200, Paul Chaignon wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 01:25:14PM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 06, 2019 at 09:20:15AM +0200, Paul Chaignon wrote:

[...]

> > > the following behaviour is very likely on that system:
> > > 
> > > $ ../strace -qf -enanosleep ./status-unfinished >/dev/null
> > > [pid 24680] nanosleep({tv_sec=123, tv_nsec=0},  <unfinished ...>
> > > [pid 24681] nanosleep({tv_sec=0, tv_nsec=12345}, NULL) = 0
> > > [pid 24680] <... nanosleep resumed>NULL) = ? ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK (Interrupted by signal)
> > 

[...]

> 
> > As for the ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK, should we just handle that case in the
> > .c test?
> 
> It's complicated by the fact that we have no information whether that case
> has happened or not.

Ah, right.  I don't see what other syscall we can use without risking a
ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK as well, so should we just try running this test
until it succeeds, kind of like threads-execve.test?

> 
> > > ../strace: Stray PTRACE_EVENT_EXEC from pid 24680, trying to recover...
> > > +++ superseded by execve in pid 24681 +++
> > > +++ exited with 0 +++
> 
> 
> -- 
> ldv