[LTP] [PATCH 2/2] POSIX: Allow pthread_cond_destroy to block
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz
Thu Oct 12 16:01:11 CEST 2017
Hi!
Do I understand this correctly that this is a preemptive fix? Since this
test seems to work fine for me, while the barrier one blocks.
Can we have this kind of information included in the commit message as
well?
> int main(void)
> {
> - pthread_t low_id;
> + pthread_t low_id, watchdog_thread;
> int rc = 0;
>
> - /* Create a new thread with default attributes */
> rc = pthread_create(&low_id, NULL, thread, NULL);
> if (rc != 0) {
> - printf(ERROR_PREFIX "pthread_create\n");
> + perror("main: pthread_create");
> exit(PTS_UNRESOLVED);
> }
>
> - /* Let the other thread run */
> - sleep(2);
> + sleep(1);
> +
> + rc = pthread_create(&watchdog_thread, NULL, watchdog, NULL);
> + if (rc != 0) {
> + perror("main: pthread_create");
> + exit(PTS_UNRESOLVED);
> + }
>
> - /* Try to destroy the cond var. This should return an error */
> rc = pthread_cond_destroy(&cond);
> if (rc != EBUSY) {
> - printf(ERROR_PREFIX "Test PASS: Expected %d(EBUSY) got %d, "
> - "though the standard states 'may' fail\n", EBUSY, rc);
> -
> - exit(PTS_PASS);
> + printf("The standard recommends returning %d, EBUSY, but got %d, %s\n",
> + EBUSY, rc, strerror(rc));
> }
Here as well, I would consider checking either for succes or for EBUSY,
it does not make any sense to return any other error than the one
specified in the standard in a case that we do not return 0.
> + pthread_cancel(watchdog_thread);
> + pthread_cancel(low_id);
> +
> printf("Test PASSED\n");
> exit(PTS_PASS);
> }
> --
> 2.14.2
>
>
> --
> Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
--
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz
More information about the ltp
mailing list