On 8/6/23 09:18, Osama Muhammad wrote:
This patch covers the testing of PR_GET_NAME by reading it's value from proc/self/task/pid/comm and matching it by the value returned by PR_GET_NAME.
So the values should match? Can you elaborate that in the change log.
Signed-off-by: Osama Muhammad osmtendev@gmail.com
.../selftests/prctl/set-process-name.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/prctl/set-process-name.c b/tools/testing/selftests/prctl/set-process-name.c index 3bc5e0e09..41f4b105d 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/prctl/set-process-name.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/prctl/set-process-name.c @@ -47,6 +47,28 @@ int check_null_pointer(char *check_name) return res; } +int check_name(void) +{
- int pid;
- pid = getpid();
- FILE *fptr;
- char path[50] = {};
Define this and use it. Don't hard-code the size. MAX_PATH_LEN - look for other such defines.
- int j;
- j = snprintf(path, 50, "/proc/self/task/%d/comm", pid);
Here - it makes it easier to maintain.
- fptr = fopen(path, "r");
- char name[TASK_COMM_LEN] = {};
- int res = prctl(PR_GET_NAME, name, NULL, NULL, NULL);
- char output[TASK_COMM_LEN] = {};
Code after declarations please. It is easier to read and follow.
- fscanf(fptr, "%s", output);
Don't you want to check error return here?
- return !strcmp(output, name);
+}
- TEST(rename_process) {
EXPECT_GE(set_name(CHANGE_NAME), 0); @@ -57,6 +79,9 @@ TEST(rename_process) { EXPECT_GE(set_name(CHANGE_NAME), 0); EXPECT_LT(check_null_pointer(CHANGE_NAME), 0);
No need to for this extra line
- EXPECT_TRUE(check_name());
- }
TEST_HARNESS_MAIN
thanks, -- Shuah