[LTP] [PATCH] syscalls: Use anonymous .resource_files for docparse

Petr Vorel pvorel@suse.cz
Fri Mar 12 12:05:32 CET 2021

Hi Cyril,

> Hi!
> > > > we need to do some investigation about it.
> > > gcc -E foo.c would do expansion for us. But not sure if it's worth of runtime.
> > > Because problem of missing definitions will be on other places and we don't want
> > > to get rid of definitions. e.g. I planned to add some tag definitions (for
> > > "linux-git", ...) as Martin Doucha suggested, but this would not work until
> > > we expand macros.

> > I was looking into the output of gcc -E but it brings other problems.
> > Wouldn't be better instead of patching like this to just replace docparse.c with
> > library support to test itself print it's description in json format
> > (e.g. --print-json opt)? I was thinking to use the same for shell tests docparse
> > (which aren't covered at all yet).

> I've been there and tried that that was v1 of the proposal, it did not work.
OK, thanks for info.

> We can add macro expansion to the docparse instead, it shouldn't be that
> hard.
Not sure if I understand what you mean. Using gcc -E or something else?

Kind regards,

More information about the ltp mailing list