[LTP] [PATCH v3 1/9] syscalls: fanotify: Add macro to require specific mark types

[Amir Goldstein]

On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 1:27 PM Matthew Bobrowski <repnop@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 06:17:24PM -0300, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> > Like done for init flags and event types, and a macro to require a
> > specific mark type.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@collabora.com>
> > ---
> >  testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h | 5 +++++
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h
> > index a2be183385e4..c67db3117e29 100644
> > --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h
> > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h
> > @@ -373,4 +373,9 @@ static inline int fanotify_mark_supported_by_kernel(uint64_t flag)
> >       return rval;
> >  }
> >
> > +#define REQUIRE_MARK_TYPE_SUPPORTED_ON_KERNEL(mark_type) do { \
> > +     fanotify_init_flags_err_msg(#mark_type, __FILE__, __LINE__, tst_brk_, \
> > +                                 fanotify_mark_supported_by_kernel(mark_type)); \
> > +} while (0)
> > +
> >  #endif /* __FANOTIFY_H__ */
>
> A nit, but I'm of the opinion that s/_ON_/_BY_ within the macro name. Otherwise,
> this looks OK to me.

Agreed. You can change that while cherry-picking to your branch ;-)

Thanks,
Amir.