-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
K arkadiusz/dirent test #294
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Unit Test Results6 591 tests +181 5 946 ✅ +170 33m 12s ⏱️ +25s For more details on these failures, see this check. Results for commit ad63326. ± Comparison against base commit 5d4aee2. ♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results. |
621088a
to
4b9a002
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some common things across the tests, which I point here:
- Delete not used headers
- Use macros instead wraper function to check errors, we want to see line number where error occurred
- Use typed asserts instead of
TEST_ASSERT_EQUAL
- Use minimal needed permissions not
0777
everywhere - Declare variables at the start of block not in the middle
- Some functions from your helper header are used only once so it misses the purpose of placing them in headers
- Use curly braces with conditional statements (many are missing)
- Many functions miss check for returned value
ecf1ffa
to
3e85c88
Compare
dirent: applied some suggestions
JIRA: CI-359
3e85c88
to
ad63326
Compare
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ | |||
#ifndef _DIRENT_HELPER_FUNCTIONS_H |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if it shouldn't be placed in common header of whole libc
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think they'll ever be needed anywhere else.
} | ||
|
||
|
||
TEST(dirent_readdir, long_name_directory_check) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see this testcase fails on some targets so it should be ignored for now and appropriate issue reported. See also that NAME_MAX can be variable depending on path and pathconf
could be used to determine it, however pathconf
is not implemented at this moment.
Description
Motivation and Context
Types of changes
How Has This Been Tested?
Checklist:
Special treatment