[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 11:49:50 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, keescook@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] selftests: pidfd: do not use ksft_exit_skip after
ksft_set_plan
On 06/07/20 22:55, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 6/24/20 12:21 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 23/06/20 22:44, Christian Brauner wrote:
>>>> ret = sys_pidfd_send_signal(pidfd, 0, NULL, 0);
>>>> if (ret < 0) {
>>>> - if (errno == ENOSYS)
>>>> - ksft_exit_skip(
>>>> + if (errno == ENOSYS) {
>>>> + ksft_test_result_skip(
>>>> "%s test: pidfd_send_signal() syscall not
>>>> supported\n",
>>>> test_name);
>>> If pidfd_send_signal() is not supported, you're falling through and then
>>> you're reporting:
>>>
>>> ok 5 # SKIP pidfd_send_signal check for support test:
>>> pidfd_send_signal() syscall not supported
>>> ok 6 pidfd_send_signal check for support test: pidfd_send_signal()
>>> syscall is supported. Tests can be executed
>>
>> You're right, this needs a "return".
>>
>
> Hi Paulo,
>
> I am applying the rest of the patches in this series except this one.
> Please send v3 for this.
Thanks, I was actually going to send everything but you're making it
even simpler. I'll send v3 of this patch only.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists