Hi all,
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 1:27 PM Matthew Bobrowski <repnop@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 06:17:24PM -0300, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> > > Like done for init flags and event types, and a macro to require a
> > > specific mark type.
> > > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h | 5 +++++
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h
> > > index a2be183385e4..c67db3117e29 100644
> > > --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h
> > > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify.h
> > > @@ -373,4 +373,9 @@ static inline int fanotify_mark_supported_by_kernel(uint64_t flag)
> > > return rval;
> > > }
> > > +#define REQUIRE_MARK_TYPE_SUPPORTED_ON_KERNEL(mark_type) do { \
> > > + fanotify_init_flags_err_msg(#mark_type, __FILE__, __LINE__, tst_brk_, \
> > > + fanotify_mark_supported_by_kernel(mark_type)); \
> > > +} while (0)
> > > +
> > > #endif /* __FANOTIFY_H__ */
> > A nit, but I'm of the opinion that s/_ON_/_BY_ within the macro name. Otherwise,
> > this looks OK to me.
> Agreed. You can change that while cherry-picking to your branch ;-)
+1. And yes, I'll change it while applying it into LTP (no need to repost).
Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@xxxxxxx>
Kind regards,
Petr
> Thanks,
> Amir.
