[LTP] recvmmsg(2) system call tests

[Cyril Hrubis]

Hi!
> About this statemement that you made:
> 
>     "Function signatures aren't needed when used just in one file." 
> 
> To whch I replied:
> 
>     "ARE required unless you reorganize you code to be all in the order
>     of called functions preceding called functions"
> 
> To which you replied:
> 
>     "Actually neither of that is true"

I actually answered only the part about 'static' being useless. Sorry
for not being clear on that.

> If you don't use prototypes you do have to reorganize the functions in 
> the order they are called.

That is indeed true.

> Are you really questioning that? I don't want to have to explain that 
> unless you don't understand why prototypes are required in some cases.

Not at all.

> If you are not questioning that. Are you ok with me using prototypes?

I do prefer to organize tests so that we don't have to use them, but I
can live with code that does not follow that as well.

> I don't mind adding static, but do realize that that will indeed mean 
> that in some compilation systems the sysmbols won't be in the symbol 
> table and will make debugging harder. I don't care if you question this 
> statment, don't have time to explain that.

For modern enough compilers and debuggers this is not true. Ancient
tooling may loose some debugging information when functions are inlined
though.

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz