On 11/27/2014 09:43 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 27/11/14 16:31, Joel Sherrill wrote:
---
cpukit/libcsupport/src/sync.c | 11 +++++++++--
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cpukit/libcsupport/src/sync.c b/cpukit/libcsupport/src/sync.c
index 653a177..e449cab 100644
--- a/cpukit/libcsupport/src/sync.c
+++ b/cpukit/libcsupport/src/sync.c
@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ int fdatasync(int); /* still not always prototyped */
#include<stdio.h>
#include<rtems.h>
+#include<rtems/score/assert.h>
/* XXX check standards -- Linux version appears to be void */
void _fwalk(struct _reent *, void *);
@@ -37,14 +38,20 @@ void _fwalk(struct _reent *, void *);
static void sync_wrapper(FILE *f)
{
int fn = fileno(f);
+ int rc;
/*
* We are explicitly NOT checking the return values as it does not
* matter if they succeed. We are just making a best faith attempt
* at both and trusting that we were passed a good FILE pointer.
*/
- fsync(fn);
- fdatasync(fn);
+ _Assert( fn != -1 );
I don't think this assert is useful, what about -2 and 99999999? Its the
job of fsync() and fdatasync() to deal with this.
OK. Makes sense so I removed that one and updated the comment.
Pushed.
+
+ rc = fsync(fn);
+ _Assert( rc == 0 );
+
+ rc = fdatasync(fn);
+ _Assert( rc == 0 );
}
/* iterate over all FILE *'s for this thread */
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
