Skip to content

Socket syscall #247

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

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jul 8, 2024
Merged

Socket syscall #247

merged 8 commits into from
Jul 8, 2024

Conversation

rupeshkoushik07
Copy link
Member

@rupeshkoushik07 rupeshkoushik07 commented May 19, 2024

Description

This is an example pull request showing how to add comments for syscalls, in this case, for the socket_syscall function.
unit tests are updated by @yashaswi2000
Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

  • Test A - lind_project/tests/test_cases/test_a.c
  • Test B - lind_project/tests/test_cases/test_b.c

Checklist:

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • Any dependent changes have been added to a pull request and/or merged in other modules (native-client, lind-glibc, lind-project)

Copy link
Member

@JustinCappos JustinCappos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A few comments in the text below to try to help make the comments better.

Where are the unit tests and benchmarks for this?

Signed-off-by: Yashaswi Makula <[email protected]>
Copy link
Member

@JustinCappos JustinCappos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good! Thanks for the changes.

Copy link
Member

@JustinCappos JustinCappos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good!

@rennergade
Copy link
Contributor

I think it makes sense to merge this and just keep a link to it as reference in the documentation issue rather than keeping it open.

@rupeshkoushik07 can you update this for the newer RustDoc and we'll get it approved?

@rupeshkoushik07
Copy link
Member Author

I have updated the comments @rennergade

Copy link
Contributor

@rennergade rennergade left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Need to update errors/panics

@rennergade
Copy link
Contributor

lets also change the name of this PR to socket comments or something like that so its not confusing once we merge

@rupeshkoushik07 rupeshkoushik07 changed the title example_PR Socket syscall Jul 6, 2024
@rennergade
Copy link
Contributor

This looks good and up to date and IDT we need this as a non-merged example anymore. Going to merge now.

@rennergade rennergade merged commit 232e99d into develop Jul 8, 2024
2 checks passed
Anway-Agte pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 15, 2024
* example_PR

* formating unit tests for socket_syscall

Signed-off-by: Yashaswi Makula <[email protected]>

* updating socket syscall tests and adding error checking for socket syscall

Signed-off-by: Yashaswi Makula <[email protected]>

* updating comments and tests

Signed-off-by: Yashaswi Makula <[email protected]>

* update comments

* update blocking comment

* update the comments

* update panics

---------

Signed-off-by: Yashaswi Makula <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Yashaswi Makula <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants