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 Wednesday 21 August 2013 12:30:10 Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > Another example of all the 64bit arches getting the definition via a > > common file, but the 32bit ones all adding it by themselves and hppa > > was missed. > > How about adding an architecture-independent testcase (Linux-specific, of > course) for this function? I've no idea whether it can test any semantics > of fanotify_init / fanotify_mark, or only that calls to them link OK, but > in general when fixing bugs it's a good idea to add testcases that would > have detected them, and both functions are in my list of untested symbols > <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2013-07/msg00386.html>, which we need > to add test coverage for bit by bit. the fatrace project [1] was used as a spot check. their is concern of running the test on a kernel where fanotify support has been disabled, but hopefully that should be easy to detect. -mike 1: https://launchpad.net/fatrace
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |