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]

Re: [PATCH v2] nptl/tst-rwlock14: Test pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock correctly



On 17/03/2019 09:39, Mike Crowe wrote:
> The tests for out-of-bounds timespecs first test pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock
> and then pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock. It appears that the second and third
> tests suffered from copy-and-paste errors and each test
> pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock twice in a row. Let's correct that so that
> pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock is tested too.
> 
> 	* nptl/tst-rwlock14.c (do_test): Replace duplicate calls to
> 	  pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock with calls to
> 	  pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock to ensure that the latter is tested
> 	  too. Use new function name in diagnostic messages too.

LGTM, but since you are there could you adapt it to libsupport?

> ---
>  ChangeLog           |  7 +++++++
>  nptl/tst-rwlock14.c | 12 ++++++------
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> This patch was originally sent as part of a larger series:
> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-02/msg00643.html
> 
> diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
> index f7c9ee51ad..248bc05351 100644
> --- a/ChangeLog
> +++ b/ChangeLog
> @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
> +2019-03-17  Mike Crowe  <mac@mcrowe.com>
> +
> +	* nptl/tst-rwlock14.c (do_test): Replace duplicate calls to
> +	pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock with calls to pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock to
> +	ensure that the latter is tested too. Use new function name in diagnostic
> +	messages too.
> +
>  2019-03-16  Samuel Thibault  <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>
>  
>  	* hurd/hurd/signal.h (_hurd_critical_section_lock): Document how EINTR
> diff --git a/nptl/tst-rwlock14.c b/nptl/tst-rwlock14.c
> index f8c218395e..6f57169531 100644
> --- a/nptl/tst-rwlock14.c
> +++ b/nptl/tst-rwlock14.c
> @@ -117,15 +117,15 @@ do_test (void)
>        result = 1;
>      }
>  
> -  e = pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock (&r, &ts);
> +  e = pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock (&r, &ts);
>    if (e == 0)
>      {
> -      puts ("second rwlock_timedrdlock did not fail");
> +      puts ("second rwlock_timedwrlock did not fail");
>        result = 1;
>      }
>    else if (e != EINVAL)
>      {
> -      puts ("second rwlock_timedrdlock did not return EINVAL");
> +      puts ("second rwlock_timedwrlock did not return EINVAL");
>        result = 1;
>      }
>  
> @@ -145,15 +145,15 @@ do_test (void)
>        result = 1;
>      }
>  
> -  e = pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock (&r, &ts);
> +  e = pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock (&r, &ts);
>    if (e == 0)
>      {
> -      puts ("third rwlock_timedrdlock did not fail");
> +      puts ("third rwlock_timedwrlock did not fail");
>        result = 1;
>      }
>    else if (e != EINVAL)
>      {
> -      puts ("third rwlock_timedrdlock did not return EINVAL");
> +      puts ("third rwlock_timedwrlock did not return EINVAL");
>        result = 1;
>      }
>  
> 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]