ed5f13261c
Passing EPERM during syscall skipping was confusing since the test wasn't
actually exercising the errno evaluation -- it was just passing a literal
"1" (EPERM). Instead, expand the tests to check both direct value returns
(positive, 45000 in this case), and errno values (negative, -ESRCH in this
case) to check both fake success and fake failure during syscall skipping.
Reported-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Fixes:
|
||
---|---|---|
.. | ||
fault-injection | ||
ktest | ||
nvdimm | ||
radix-tree | ||
scatterlist | ||
selftests | ||
vsock |