[LTP] [PATCH v2] Add epoll_wait06 test

[Cyril Hrubis]

Hi!
> This test verifies EPOLLET functionality.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Cervesato <andrea.cervesato@suse.com>
> ---
>  .../kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore     |  1 +
>  .../kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait06.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 98 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait06.c
> 
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore
> index ab5a9c010..8c5ed7c5c 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/.gitignore
> @@ -3,3 +3,4 @@ epoll_wait02
>  epoll_wait03
>  epoll_wait04
>  epoll_wait05
> +epoll_wait06
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait06.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait06.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000..20f6233c9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll_wait/epoll_wait06.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> +/*
> + * Copyright (C) 2022 SUSE LLC Andrea Cervesato <andrea.cervesato@suse.com>
> + */
> +
> +/*\
> + * [Description]
> + *
> + * Verify that edge triggered behavior is correctly handled by epoll.
> + *
> + * [Algorithm]
> + *
> + * 1. The file descriptor that represents the read side of a pipe (rfd) is
> + *    registered on the epoll instance.
> + * 2. A pipe writer writes 2 kB of data on the write side of the pipe.
> + * 3. A call to epoll_wait(2) is done that will return rfd as a ready file
> + *    descriptor.
> + * 4. The pipe reader reads 1 kB of data from rfd.
> + * 5. A call to epoll_wait(2) should fail because there's data left to read.
> + */

I do not like this description that much. First of all the the flag we
are testing is not mentioned there at all, the EPOLLET should be
mentioned in the [Description].

The second call to epoll_wait() does not fail, failure for syscall means
that -1 is returned and errno is set. It does not report any data ready
on the file descriptor, that is not failure at all, that is how the
EPOLLET flag is supposed to work.

> +#include <poll.h>
> +#include <sys/epoll.h>
> +#include "tst_test.h"
> +
> +#define WRITE_SIZE 2048
> +#define READ_SIZE (WRITE_SIZE / 2)
> +
> +static int fds[2];
> +static int epfd;
> +
> +static void cleanup(void)
> +{
> +	if (epfd > 0)
> +		SAFE_CLOSE(epfd);
> +
> +	if (fds[0] > 0)
> +		SAFE_CLOSE(fds[0]);
> +
> +	if (fds[1] > 0)
> +		SAFE_CLOSE(fds[1]);
> +}
> +
> +static void run(void)
> +{
> +	int res;
> +	char buff[WRITE_SIZE];
> +	struct epoll_event evt_receive;
> +	struct epoll_event evt_request;
> +
> +	SAFE_PIPE(fds);
> +
> +	evt_request.events = EPOLLIN | EPOLLET;
> +	evt_request.data.fd = fds[0];
> +
> +	epfd = epoll_create(2);
> +	if (epfd == -1)
> +		tst_brk(TBROK | TERRNO, "fail to create epoll instance");
> +
> +	tst_res(TINFO, "Polling channel with EPOLLET");
> +
> +	res = epoll_ctl(epfd, EPOLL_CTL_ADD, fds[0], &evt_request);
> +	if (res == -1)
> +		tst_brk(TBROK | TERRNO, "epoll_ctl failure");
> +
> +	tst_res(TINFO, "Write bytes on channel");
> +
> +	memset(buff, 'a', WRITE_SIZE);
> +	SAFE_WRITE(0, fds[1], buff, WRITE_SIZE);
> +
> +	res = epoll_wait(epfd, &evt_receive, 1, 2000);
> +	if (res <= 0) {
> +		tst_res(TFAIL | TERRNO, "epoll_wait() returned %i", res);
> +		goto close;
> +	}
> +
> +	if ((evt_receive.events & EPOLLIN) == 0) {
> +		tst_res(TFAIL, "No data received");
> +		goto close;
> +	}
> +
> +	tst_res(TINFO, "Received EPOLLIN event. Read half bytes from channel");
> +
> +	memset(buff, 0, READ_SIZE);
> +	SAFE_READ(1, evt_receive.data.fd, buff, READ_SIZE);
> +
> +	TST_EXP_EQ_LI(epoll_wait(epfd, &evt_receive, 1, 10), 0);
> +
> +close:

	SAFE_CLOSE(epfd) ?

> +	SAFE_CLOSE(fds[0]);
> +	SAFE_CLOSE(fds[1]);
> +}
> +
> +static struct tst_test test = {
> +	.cleanup = cleanup,
> +	.test_all = run,
> +};
> -- 
> 2.35.3
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz