[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E1DCDE5.1040008@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 18:55:01 +0200
From: Luka Marčetić <paxcoder@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: cluts review
On 07/13/2011 06:03 PM, Solar Designer wrote:
> Luka, Rich -
>
> The below is not criticism, but just some feedback on my test run of
> cluts earlier today.
>
> So, with the changes that I described before, I built cluts on a glibc
> 2.3.6'ish linux-threads system (yes, pre-NPTL).
> [...]
>
> As to cluts going to sleep, this is probably a bug in alloc.c. If this
> file is going to be rewritten, then it might not make sense to chase the
> bug down now. But it is useful to re-test the new version with low
> RLIMIT_AS as well.
Thanks for the tip.
> After a while, I killed the alloc thread that consumed the most CPU time.
>
> (BTW, all of them are just ./cluts in "ps" because cluts.c passes its
> own argv[0] to exec. Perhaps it'd be nicer to fix that.)
Wasn't aware of this. Will fix.
> The 'alloc' test collection crashed!
> Executing 'buf' test collection...
>
> I got lots of errors from "numeric" - I didn't bother recording most.
> The above are just a few of them.
In my opinion, the errors are warranted. But I asked Rich for review on
that one. In fact, the collection blocks a lot of error messages. Each
string that gets passed to multiple functions is printed only with the
first function that fails running with it (in your, strtoumax appears a
lot of times, because that's the first function that gets executed with
each string). The huge long long integer printout is I guess what makes
it look as if there are more messages than there are. Other than that,
it's probably the implementations. If it still turns out to be a test
data issue, let me know.
> The 'numeric' test collection failed 16384 test(s).
Hmm, is it an up-to-date version of cluts.c? The number is overblown.
> Executing 'string' test collection...
> The 'string' test collection passed.
String.c always does (it still returns 0 no matter what) ;-P
> Test collections passed: 1/4
>
> This is the known issue with number of failed test collections, right?
> Should have been 2, I guess.
This is the number of passed collections. I don't know why it says "out
of four" here, if you still have the buf.c-less version :-/
> Thanks,
>
> Alexander
Thank you for the review.
I'll offer my responses to feedback in form of commits :-)
Luka.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
