This is the mail archive of the
libc-help@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: tst-posix_fallocate test failure
- From: Renaud Marquet <rmarquet at gmail dot com>
- To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at systemhalted dot org>
- Cc: libc-help at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:52:15 +0100
- Subject: Re: tst-posix_fallocate test failure
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:to:cc :in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version :x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=09B4fXdyQ160KtmU6S9zmzSuA3fpJZKaGAtHx86I/f8=; b=jeCXaBxFAzxxqFbFiu9luSZlUpcKJ5zgJItKgnSr4UcN0ZPCdbIqoyDzORl4NCx7um gBD395UMnc/ESLDg5NOjuAGvhCtjHLamBzi3bMKuIGxrPnyE3O9CSgLci+RxfGuiBx5u fhRb8ppiebH27flH6ZzLuvXWAG8W/0LkMc2Z4=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=QczamBOMY+bZspghyHZZN8kazZCqnCXrJeez0ScDcieXp+9Adj/nE2+lWqkGlUctvp sHI7bT0mgNWHpnwEkunP2LcWCa+RiNp3WYdvM/+1IQcZXBvCjjBrIqxt2Oes1Dy2wfyo SCDBz46IfV/Med+gT8MgrD9GMuD43hheHY/QA=
- References: <1227553256.7239.10.camel@antec> <119aab440811250610x36da147ch39d74b760ba6e69@mail.gmail.com> <1227651820.7279.29.camel@antec> <119aab440811260641q87d5bd0q3414ab1d3c8c043e@mail.gmail.com>
Le mercredi 26 novembre 2008 Ã 09:41 -0500, Carlos O'Donell a Ãcrit :
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Renaud Marquet <rmarquet@gmail.com> wrote:
> > As suggested I did a little step into the failing test. But I cannot
> > figure out what's happening. I hope you'll get a clearer idea of the
> > problem with this. Here's a dump of the gdb session :
>
> Nothing seems out of place, it doesn't look like the syscall to fallocate fails.
>
> You'll have to figure out what the test is trying to assert and see if
> it is logically true.
When I link the test with host system's glibc, it do not fail although
it's also a PowerPC 64 bits binary. So I can reasonably think the test
is correct and should complete successfully. It's true syscall don't
fail (no error returned) but at the same time it seems to do absolutely
nothing (file size don't change). As as said I don't understand why the
code in lines 42 and 44 seems to be executed twice. Is it related to
some macro expansion ?
>
> Perhaps one of the PowerPC users has seen this test failure and knows
> the reason.
>
> Have you looked through the bugzilla? Filed a bugzilla bug?
I already looked over google and bugzilla before posting here and did
not find any other report of this problem. I don't think I'll file a new
bug as it seems to be very specific to my build and I didn't test it
against latest cvs version.
This was the only test that failed and it's not really a critical
function. Moreover calling the function produces no error. So I guess
I'll try to live with it hoping it will not become a serious issue
later.
Anyway thank you for your help and suggestions.
Cheers,
Renaud.