From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23086 invoked by alias); 26 Aug 2013 03:54:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 23024 invoked by uid 89); 26 Aug 2013 03:54:17 -0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (HELO smtp.gentoo.org) (140.211.166.183) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 03:54:17 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00,KHOP_PGP_SIGNED,KHOP_THREADED autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: smtp.gentoo.org Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFA4333EC09; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 03:54:14 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger To: "Joseph S. Myers" Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] hppa: add fanotify_mark Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 03:54:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.10.6; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; ) Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, libc-ports@sourceware.org, carlos@systemhalted.org References: <1377100993-9438-1-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1600100.ADGzTK3xLv"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201308252354.20508.vapier@gentoo.org> X-SW-Source: 2013-08/txt/msg00043.txt.bz2 --nextPart1600100.ADGzTK3xLv Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-length: 1006 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. >=20 > 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 > , 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 runn= ing=20 the test on a kernel where fanotify support has been disabled, but hopefull= y=20 that should be easy to detect. -mike 1: https://launchpad.net/fatrace --nextPart1600100.ADGzTK3xLv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-length: 836 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJSGtFsAAoJEEFjO5/oN/WBh3IQANt81NrJ2cBkhaV2YPbkBG3e Lg5t0oCoxSQuLytGfI4Wp5AMJyP6W4vp9wc7aOvAHYpnj/9hv/JasWMylaETfx6J rslLqvFldIO1Sx3E8yAbaGOiF9oCm9gvvei+j/vTJpj93kNA+XfJL3Z2dnZWIMQ7 6lFOgFKZkfRGRHzFjy6OOyl8WFh6fX2jwGUUTsnUQtaxWNQ1uhA3SCEE2Qfjp/u6 TGyoObnf/2iVTF9DYtyqQsxtAc+K8Fj7/lNOB6ghJqzXZSDDa7DD1kG3xpOseYK7 kjlkEq65Lg7q5UUjk7s3g39R+SNorTqxeEDHCEnZonik5UezVbNWJkHrgbbrvJe2 BTy+88wkpL2c4kUFd37swCwAxFlrQnGx7kiB+Q2b7PzCjOKgqPBWTffqIkFToOO6 i/dgRr/Y5iWNKdau+sfAgOWiHC/x8TO1OlD1QKywPjEKvbIEGop0wAxsnK1ZKyaC /oBCZ8lZcBKb/Zo8O4vlOxWa22YPpdpWK7QKs1bhju6D9g3xbpLxvyVECe90/6FC a+TKrN+Xc+2jGCE/aZaQqRJxk1PvRWjWjjvaRTsUdx3TRNRASizjsDLoIsh7+XGQ wLnZ+o2JgF0UPS63xPUtfe8VZG1d/aDFnw5HSSnjAToYDubKTh2kaPfEez68cb0f sFwWLerVKeo62GJKeqBD =2B5T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1600100.ADGzTK3xLv--