Re: [LTP] setuid04 incorrect loop count patch

On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 10:41 +0800, Guo Hongruan wrote: > Hi Guys, > how many loops should setuid04 run test case using "setuid04 -i 2"? It > should be 2 but in fact, it is 3, This patch solves this problem. Hoppe it > is useful. > > Thanks a lot! Thanks. Regards-- Subrata > > -- > Guo

Re: [LTP] patch for mount02.c and mount03.c bugs(maybe)

On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 08:32 +0800, Guo Hongruan wrote: > Attached is the patch against ltp cvs version. Thanks. Merged. Regards-- Subrata > > On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:44:45 +0800, Subrata Modak > wrote: > > > On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:54 +0800, Guo Hongruan wrote: > >> see attachment for the p

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 01/03] Add splice02 as a new syscall test in LTP [LKML Subject: nfs: add support for splice writes]

Thanks Jens/Manas for this contribution. Added to LTP. Regards-- Subrata On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 18:20 +0530, Manas K Nayak wrote: > Hi Jens, > > >This patch attempts to add splice writes support. In essence, it just > >calls generic_file_splice_write() after doing a little sanity check. > >This w

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 02/03] Add clock_nanosleep2() syscall test to LTP [LKML Subject: Issue with clock_nanosleep(), TIMER_ABSTIME and CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE not set]

Thanks Mathias/Manas for this contribution. Added to LTP. Regards-- Subrata On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 17:57 +0530, Manas K Nayak wrote: > Hi Mathias, > > >Hi all! > >I am using kernel 2.6.29.1 from kernel.org on a Debian 5.0 (Lenny) system > >(Intel Core2Quad). > >GCC is 4.3.2 > >I have not set CON

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 03/03] Add cacheflush() syscall test to LTP [LKML Subject: cacheflush system call not returning -EINVAL]

Thanks John/Manas for this contribution. Added to LTP. Regards-- Subrata On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 17:57 +0530, Manas K Nayak wrote: > Hi John, > > >cacheflush man page states that cacheflush() will set EINVAL if cache > >parameter is not one of ICACHE, DCACHE, or BCACHE. > >In order to confirm thi

[LTP] setuid04 incorrect loop count patch

Hi Guys, how many loops should setuid04 run test case using "setuid04 -i 2"? It should be 2 but in fact, it is 3, This patch solves this problem. Hoppe it is useful. Thanks a lot! -- Guo Hongruan, Embedded Linux Consultant Mobile: +86-0-13484056007 Skype: camelguo http://www.gulessoft.co

[LTP] setuid04 loop counter is incorrect

Hi Guy, I found a bug of setuid04/setuid04_16. How to reproduce: 1. ./setuid04 -i 2 2. the output of it is # ./setuid04 -i 2 setuid041 PASS : open returned errno EACCES setuid042 PASS : open returned errno EACCES setuid041 PASS : open returned errno EACCES setuid04

Re: [LTP] patch for mount02.c and mount03.c bugs(maybe)

Attached is the patch against ltp cvs version. On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:44:45 +0800, Subrata Modak wrote: On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:54 +0800, Guo Hongruan wrote: see attachment for the patch. I think you need to resend this based on the latest CVS. See the failures in applying the patch: p

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 03/03] Add cacheflush() syscall test to LTP [LKML Subject: cacheflush system call not returning -EINVAL]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Subrata Modak wrote: > On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 17:31 +0530, Maxin John wrote: >> Hi Subrata, >> >> As I have already mentioned, I have no objections in contributing this >> test to LTP under GPL License. > > Thanks. > >> In fact, I have joined LTP mail

[LTP] Running LTP from a custom file system

Hi, I am a newbie to LTP. I am trying to test a custom shared file system using the LTP. I have mounted my file system on /my-filesys on my linux box. I have few questions about testing this file system using LTP. I would require your help to get these doubts resolved. 1. Is it required that LTP

[LTP] Running LTP from a custom file system

Hi, I am a newbie to LTP. I am trying to test a custom shared file system using the LTP. I have mounted my file system on /my-filesys on my linux box. I have few questions about testing this file system using LTP. I would require your help to get these doubts resolved. 1. Is it required that LTP

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 03/03] Add cacheflush() syscall test to LTP [LKML Subject: cacheflush system call not returning -EINVAL]

On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 17:31 +0530, Maxin John wrote: > Hi Subrata, > > As I have already mentioned, I have no objections in contributing this > test to LTP under GPL License. Thanks. > In fact, I have joined LTP mailing list today and will try to > contribute to LTP whenever possible. Thatś gr

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 03/03] Add cacheflush() syscall test to LTP [LKML Subject: cacheflush system call not returning -EINVAL]

Hi Subrata, As I have already mentioned, I have no objections in contributing this test to LTP under GPL License. In fact, I have joined LTP mailing list today and will try to contribute to LTP whenever possible. Warm Regards, Maxin B. John On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Subrata Modak wrote

Re: [LTP] clone07 bug and patch

On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 09:00 +0800, Guo Hongruan wrote: > attachment is the patch file I had already applied this yesterday. Thanks. Regards-- Subrata > > On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 22:38:00 +0800, Subrata Modak > wrote: > > > On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 09:22 +0800, Guo Hongruan wrote: > >> How to repr

Re: [LTP] patch for mount02.c and mount03.c bugs(maybe)

On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 08:54 +0800, Guo Hongruan wrote: > see attachment for the patch. I think you need to resend this based on the latest CVS. See the failures in applying the patch: patching file testcases/kernel/syscalls/mount/mount02.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 414. 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving r

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 03/03] Add cacheflush() syscall test to LTP [LKML Subject: cacheflush system call not returning -EINVAL]

Hi John, On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 17:57 +0530, Manas K Nayak wrote: > Hi John, > > >cacheflush man page states that cacheflush() will set EINVAL if cache > >parameter is not one of ICACHE, DCACHE, or BCACHE. > >In order to confirm this behavior, I have executed the below listed > >program (cacheflu

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 02/03] Add clock_nanosleep2() syscall test to LTP [LKML Subject: Issue with clock_nanosleep(), TIMER_ABSTIME and CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE not set]

Hi Mathias, On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 09:36 +0200, M. Koehrer wrote: > Hi Manas, > > thanks for your mail. > I agree that you can use this tiny program to contribute it to LTP under the > GPL. Thanks for this. > I don't know if it helps you there as the issue can be reproduced only when > stoppin

[LTP] ptrace06 is not being compiled

Hi, ptrace06 test case is not being compiled. It seems like it excluded by ltp itself. In ltp-full-20090331/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ptrace/Makefile, line 22: SRCS= $(wildcard *[^6].c)] Is this understanding correct? If it is not being compiled then it should be

Re: [LTP] [PATCH 02/03] Add clock_nanosleep2() syscall test to LTP [LKML Subject: Issue with clock_nanosleep(), TIMER_ABSTIME and CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE not set]

Hi Manas, thanks for your mail. I agree that you can use this tiny program to contribute it to LTP under the GPL. I don't know if it helps you there as the issue can be reproduced only when stopping the program via gdb. I assume that the LTP programs are running in a kind of batch mode or is it

[LTP] ioctl01_02 test case fails in ltp-full-20090331

Hi, Ioctl01_02 (ioctl102) test case fails in ltp-full-20090331 but It was passing in ltp-full-20090228. In ltp-full-20090331/testcases/kernel/syscalls/ioctl/test_ioctl, line 52 for tttype in `ls /dev/tty*` do device_no=${tttype:8} case "$device_no" in [0-9]|[0-9][0-9]) tst_re