[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aWkRvBz734sa_1vV@desktop.y-koj.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 01:21:00 +0900
From: Yohei Kojima <yk@...oj.net>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] selftests: net: improve error handling
in passive TFO test
On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 09:33:12AM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Improve the error handling in passive TFO test to check the return value
> > from sendto(), and to fail if read() or fprintf() failed.
>
> You propose to adjust error detection and corresponding exception handling another bit.
> How do you think about to take also another look if further function implementations
> would be similarly affected?
Thank you for the suggestion. The first objective of this series is to
fix the misleading behavior that was caused by the following bug.
Therefore, I intentionally limited the scope of this patch to the
affected or closely related functions.
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/602c9e1ba5bb2ee1997bb38b1d866c9c3b807ae9.1767624906.git.yk@y-koj.net/
I believe this is sufficient to prevent it from showing misleading error
messages when the test fails.
Thank you,
Yohei
>
> Regards,
> Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists