On 10/20/25 16:26, Peter Maydell wrote:
+#define _GNU_SOURCE
Why do we need to define this now ?
'mremap' isn't POSIX, so on Linux at least is only exposed if
_GNU_SOURCE is defined.
>> - fprintf(stderr, "FAILED at %s:%d\n", __FILE__, __LINE__); \
+ fprintf(stderr, " FAILED at %s:%d\n", __FILE__, __LINE__); \
I think that this is trying to fix a cosmetic bug in
the printing of error messages: the tests each print
some line without a newline, like:
fprintf(stdout, "%s addr=%p", __func__, (void *)addr);
and then for the passing case we add a space and complete the line:
fprintf(stdout, " passed\n");
but this fail_unless() macro is not adding the space, so
presumably we print something awkward like
check_invalid_mmaps addr=0x12435468FAILED at ...
But we should separate out this trivial cleanup from
the patch adding a new test case.
[snip]
Can we leave the printfs for the existing test cases alone?
You can add a new one for your new subcase:
fprintf(stdout, "%s mremap addr=%p", __func__, addr);
Sorry about all of this---I got quite confused by the printing logic in
this file, mainly because AFAICT it's pretty buggy. For instance, the
old prints in 'check_invalid_mmaps' would have caused output something
like this:
check_invalid_mmap addr=0x1234check_invalid_mmap addr=0x1234 passed
I agree that this is a separate issue though, so I'll put all of the
printing logic back how it was and add a matching fprintf for my new
subcase. I'll leave the cleanup here to someone else.
@@ -496,6 +532,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
check_file_fixed_eof_mmaps();
check_file_unfixed_eof_mmaps();
check_invalid_mmaps();
+ check_shrink_mmaps();
I was going to complain about indent on this line, but the
problem seems to be that the file is incorrectly
indented with hardcoded tabs for parts of it.
Oops! I mostly work in a language where my editor config forces space
indentation, so occasionally forget to set space indentation when I do
need to. Will correct (and double-check indentation in the rest of the
series) in the next revision.
Thanks for the feedback!
--
Matthew
