This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Take 2: Fix false positives in tst-pthread-getattr testcase


On 7/20/2012 1:33 PM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 21:29:09 +0530, Siddhesh wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:13:33 -0400, Carlos wrote:
>>>> 2012-07-20  Siddhesh Poyarekar  <siddhesh@redhat.com>
>>>>
>>>> 	* tst-pthread-getattr.c (MAX_STACK_SIZE): New max cap for
>>>> stack size.
>>>
>>> I see nothing in your comments that mentions this is a workaround
>>> to a kernel problem? We should document in the test case comments
>>> *why* we are doing this, thus future maintainers can decide to
>>> remove the code once the kernel is fixed.
>>>
>>> Does that make sense?
>>>
>>
>> My fault -- my email blurb was incorrect. While the original concern
>> was the kernel behaviour that we saw, we would still need the max cap
>> since RLIMIT_STACK could actually be unlimited or very high, causing
>> this failure. I tried to focus on tying in the previous communication
>> threads and forgot to mention this point anywhere except in the patch.
>>
> 
> And I should have ended that with "So is it OK to commit without
> the comment or would you still like a mention of the possible kernel
> bug?".

I would still like you to mention the possibility of a kernel bug.

I'm also OK with URLs in comments pointing at public mailing list
discussions about such things. I consider the sourceware.org archives
to be long lived.

Cheers,
Carlos.
-- 
Carlos O'Donell
Mentor Graphics / CodeSourcery
carlos_odonell@mentor.com
carlos@codesourcery.com
+1 (613) 963 1026


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]