Re: [PATCH 0/5] btrfs decoding fixes

On 5/26/16 11:33 PM, je...@suse.com wrote: > From: Jeff Mahoney > > After submitting the last patch, I hunted down the last of the test case > failures. These are all failures in the output side of a RW ioctl and > those test cases weren't easily runnable. They are now, provided > a btrfs file

[PATCH 0/5] btrfs decoding fixes

From: Jeff Mahoney After submitting the last patch, I hunted down the last of the test case failures. These are all failures in the output side of a RW ioctl and those test cases weren't easily runnable. They are now, provided a btrfs file system is made available to them via a BTRFS_MOUNTPOINT

[PATCH 5/5] file_ioctl.c: fix FIDEDUPERANGE output

From: Jeff Mahoney * file_ioctl.c (file_ioctl): initialize rc to true in FIDEDUPERANGE. Otherwise we'll never show the output data in abbrev mode. --- file_ioctl.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/file_ioctl.c b/file_ioctl.c index b065db9..26b1d9f 100644 ---

[PATCH 3/5] tests/btrfs.c: fix live btrfs_test_search_ioctls output

From: Jeff Mahoney * tests/btrfs.c (btrfs_test_search_ioctls): use print_tree_search_buf for BTRFS_IOC_TREE_SEARCH and fix missing whitespace --- tests/btrfs.c | 7 +-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/btrfs.c b/tests/btrfs.c index d2b1637..f1dee55 100644

[PATCH 2/5] btrfs.c: don't use print_array in btrfs_print_tree_search

From: Jeff Mahoney * btrfs.c (btrfs_print_tree_search): don't use print_array. The buffer represents a series of variable sized records, not an array. --- btrfs.c | 42 ++ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) diff --git a/btrfs.c b/btrfs.c

[PATCH 4/5] tests: check decoding of btrfs RDWR ioctls returned data

From: Jeff Mahoney * tests/btrfs-vw.test: New file. * tests/btrfs-w.test: New file. * tests/Makefile.am (DECODER_TESTS): Add btrfs-w.test and btrfs-vw.test. --- tests/Makefile.am | 2 ++ tests/btrfs-vw.test | 29 + tests/btrfs-w.test | 29 +

[PATCH 1/5] btrfs.c: fix print_array usage in btrfs_print_logical_ino_container

From: Jeff Mahoney * btrfs.c: (btrfs_print_logical_ino_container) Fix the element count to reflect the number of records rather than the number of items. --- btrfs.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/btrfs.c b/btrfs.c index c1c9592..af0645c 100644 --- a/btrfs.c

Re: [PATCH] tests/btrfs.c: fix btrfs-v for BTRFS_IOC_TREE_SEARCH

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 04:09:28PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote: > * tests/btrfs.c (btrfs_test_send_ioctl): Assign key_reference to > search_args for BTRFS_IOC_TREE_SEARCH ioctl tests. Applied, thanks. -- ldv pgpsLqyNrxpGa.pgp Description: PGP signature

[PATCH] tests/btrfs.c: fix btrfs-v for BTRFS_IOC_TREE_SEARCH

* tests/btrfs.c (btrfs_test_send_ioctl): Assign key_reference to search_args for BTRFS_IOC_TREE_SEARCH ioctl tests. --- tests/btrfs.c | 10 +- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/btrfs.c b/tests/btrfs.c index ee731bb..d2b1637 100644 --- a/tests/btrfs.c +++

Re: [PATCH v2] Fix -yy documentation

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 03:29:41PM +, Fabien Siron wrote: > * strace.c (usage): Fix -yy documentation. > * strace.1: Likewise. > --- > strace.1 | 2 +- > strace.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/strace.1 b/strace.1 > index 429cdfc..b7dddc0 100644 >

Re: [PATCH] Fix -yy documentation

Quoting Dmitry V. Levin (2016-05-26 15:12:02) > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 03:04:11PM +, Fabien Siron wrote: > > * strace.c (usage): Fix -yy documentation. > > * strace.1: Likewise. > > --- > > strace.1 | 2 +- > > strace.c | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > dif

[PATCH v2] Fix -yy documentation

* strace.c (usage): Fix -yy documentation. * strace.1: Likewise. --- strace.1 | 2 +- strace.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/strace.1 b/strace.1 index 429cdfc..b7dddc0 100644 --- a/strace.1 +++ b/strace.1 @@ -325,7 +325,7 @@ Print all strings in hexadecimal

Re: [PATCH 1/2] tests: add mount.test

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 03:58:36PM +0800, Fei Jie wrote: [...] > +int > +main(void) > +{ > + static const char source[] = "mount_source"; > + static const char target[] = "mount_target"; > + long rc = syscall(__NR_mount, source, target, "ext2", MS_INVAL, NULL); > + printf("mount(\"%

Re: [PATCH] Fix -yy documentation

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 03:04:11PM +, Fabien Siron wrote: > * strace.c (usage): Fix -yy documentation. > * strace.1: Likewise. > --- > strace.1 | 2 +- > strace.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/strace.1 b/strace.1 > index 429cdfc..83c78ca 100644 >

Re: [PATCH] tests: add signal_receive.test

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 03:56:41PM +0800, Fei Jie wrote: [...] > diff --git a/tests/signal_receive.c b/tests/signal_receive.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000..73c4ea3 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/tests/signal_receive.c > @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ > +#include "tests.h" > +#include > +#include > +#include

[PATCH] Fix -yy documentation

* strace.c (usage): Fix -yy documentation. * strace.1: Likewise. --- strace.1 | 2 +- strace.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/strace.1 b/strace.1 index 429cdfc..83c78ca 100644 --- a/strace.1 +++ b/strace.1 @@ -325,7 +325,7 @@ Print all strings in hexadecimal

Re: [PATCH v3] Add -e trace=%sched option for tracing scheduler related syscalls

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 07:29:18PM +0530, Md Haris Iqbal wrote: > --- > NEWS | 1 + > defs.h| 1 + > linux/32/syscallent.h | 24 > linux/64/syscallent.h | 24 > linux/alpha/syscalle

Re: [PATCH 2/2] tests: add vhangup.test

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 03:58:37PM +0800, Fei Jie wrote: > * tests/vhangup.c: New file. > * tests/vhangup.test: New test. > * tests/.gitignore: Add vhangup. > * tests/Makefile.am (check_PROGRAMS): Likewise. > (DECODER_TESTS): Add vhangup.test. Applied with a correction commit on top of it. -- l

Re: question about testcases

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 04:59:18PM +0800, Fei, Jie/费 杰 wrote: > Hi all, > > Do you think that the testcase of running a lot of strace processes at > the same time worth testing? Is it going to be a test of strace or a test of operating systems? If it's the first case, then yes. If it's the secon

question about testcases

Hi all, Do you think that the testcase of running a lot of strace processes at the same time worth testing? I'll be appreciated if you can give your advice. -- Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting.