This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 10/04/2017 03:15 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, H.J. Lu wrote:This is what I checked in.This fix doesn't seem to be on 2.26 branch, but needs to go there as the original patch went there. I don't think using an int count of errors and returning it from do_test is a good coding pattern, because if the count reaches 77 it will result in a spurious UNSUPPORTED result. Of course in this particular test it can't reach 77, but a better pattern is either a boolean error state (set to true rather than using ++, given the warning quoted here), or a count but with do_test returning errors != 0.
Agreed. Note that TEST_VERIFY allows the test to continue after a failure, and it also arranges for a non-zero exit status (even across fork, but currently not across dlopen). It's usually a good alternative to such error variables.
Thanks, Florian
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |