Apologies! The explanation (and what I'll include in v4) is below: The previous test depended on the assumption that P9_DOTL_AT_REMOVEDIR and AT_REMOVEDIR have the same value.
While this is true on Linux, it is not true everywhere, and leads to an incorrect test failure on unlink_at, noticed when adding 9p to darwin. On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 2:04 AM Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote: > > -EMISSINGPATCHDESCRIPTION > > Please avoid sending patches without patch description. E.g. explain here > *why* this needs to be adjusted. > > Thanks, > Thomas > > > On 28/01/2022 01.56, Will Cohen wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Fabian Franz <git...@fabian-franz.de> > > Signed-off-by: Will Cohen <wwco...@gmail.com> > > --- > > tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c > > index 41fed41de1..6bcf89f0f8 100644 > > --- a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c > > +++ b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c > > @@ -1270,7 +1270,7 @@ static void fs_unlinkat_dir(void *obj, void *data, > QGuestAllocator *t_alloc) > > /* ... and is actually a directory */ > > g_assert((st.st_mode & S_IFMT) == S_IFDIR); > > > > - do_unlinkat(v9p, "/", "02", AT_REMOVEDIR); > > + do_unlinkat(v9p, "/", "02", P9_DOTL_AT_REMOVEDIR); > > /* directory should be gone now */ > > g_assert(stat(new_dir, &st) != 0); > > > >
