[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMy_GT_4dqEuSfUGND9GTBxGORcwf480-a46Z=J736YHo2RkDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2021 12:18:26 +0800
From: Po-Hsu Lin <po-hsu.lin@...onical.com>
To: linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
shuah <shuah@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
ast@...nel.org, Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>,
daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org, kafai@...com,
songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com, john.fastabend@...il.com,
kpsingh@...nel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, hawk@...nel.org,
nikolay@...dia.com, gnault@...hat.com, vladimir.oltean@....com,
idosch@...dia.com, baowen.zheng@...igine.com, danieller@...dia.com,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] selftests: Use kselftest skip code for skipped tests
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 4:54 PM Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com> wrote:
>
>
> Po-Hsu Lin <po-hsu.lin@...onical.com> writes:
>
> > There are several test cases still using exit 0 when they need to be
> > skipped. Use kselftest framework skip code instead so it can help us
> > to distinguish the proper return status.
> >
> > Criterion to filter out what should be fixed in selftests directory:
> > grep -r "exit 0" -B1 | grep -i skip
> >
> > This change might cause some false-positives if people are running
> > these test scripts directly and only checking their return codes,
> > which will change from 0 to 4. However I think the impact should be
> > small as most of our scripts here are already using this skip code.
> > And there will be no such issue if running them with the kselftest
> > framework.
> >
> > V2: router_mpath_nh.sh and outer_mpath_nh_res.sh sources lib.sh,
> > there is no need to assign ksft_skip value in these two.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Po-Hsu Lin <po-hsu.lin@...onical.com>
>
> I want to note that defining ksft_skip=4 in every test separately is the
> current practice. I agree with Willem (in a parallel thread) that this
> stuff should live in a library of its own, but there is none currently.
> When there is, it looks like the conversion would be mechanical.
>
> Which is to say, IMHO this patch makes sense on its own as an
> incremental improvement.
>
> Reviewed-by: Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>
Hello folks,
any other comment on this patch? Or if I should break this down to
smaller patches for different suites in kselftests?
Thanks!
PHLin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists