On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 04:00:54PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c index 063f9959ac44..d8b59c8f6c03 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c @@ -596,7 +596,7 @@ int run_syscall(int min, int max) CASE_TEST(write_badf); EXPECT_SYSER(1, write(-1, &tmp, 1), -1, EBADF); break; CASE_TEST(write_zero); EXPECT_SYSZR(1, write(1, &tmp, 0)); break; CASE_TEST(syscall_noargs); EXPECT_SYSEQ(1, syscall(__NR_getpid), getpid()); break;
CASE_TEST(syscall_args); EXPECT_SYSER(1, syscall(__NR_fstat, 0, NULL), -1, EFAULT); break;
CASE_TEST(syscall_args); EXPECT_SYSER(1, syscall(__NR_read, -1, &tmp, 1), -1, EBADF); break;The goal of this second test was to make sure that arguments are passed in the correct order. For this I tried to have a syscall were the checked error is generated from a non-first argument. (The NULL generating the EFAULT). So the new check does not fullfil this goal anymore.
Ah OK good to know.
Maybe we can find a new syscall to test with?
Maybe it would be worth considering pselect() or equivalent which involve many arguments. I don't know if rv32 has fstatat() or lstat() for example, that could be used as alternatives ?
The code should have had a comment I guess.
Indeed ;-)
With that said, if rv32 is missing some essential syscalls, my question regarding its relevance here still holds!
Willy