From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E321EC4338F for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 10:51:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5E656136F for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 10:51:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236184AbhHWKw1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2021 06:52:27 -0400 Received: from new3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.229]:52863 "EHLO new3-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234848AbhHWKwZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Aug 2021 06:52:25 -0400 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EE89580A21; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 06:51:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 23 Aug 2021 06:51:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=ufqiem 6SAD2gmS09HTUfWTb2O1UhArrikQy5twUdyAM=; b=E/i4PVIBqPIWwQVvxsJ7lB /ch89DlRbyc5BxRHqoRS67vkrTz8CMJaXLxv5uNMxxJI5un3sIYR63l7KSJR9+xl HqJFeSXGFdUPsfxOmR0Xamo2Gc/2UneCBO4osHK4B81WgneJSEM5muPNVN8NVLaI 2FpDUI8+I8l+NGp9I0Z2vmMXYGfKa1DTz2zdFENecYjd4TyiuaPcaaoW3ZjK37m0 37Ic0BYcAOq1NOh9YfwftPs5pEv7amYT5Lq/CxDG2HpbhOQdCfD4L3Hld4H2mP0i 80bq0Ml9763Z5H/w+AvZ4u/tm1n2mQhE/V6hk9oT9sQI544Y/wlyMtEYFmN0f4dw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddruddthedgfeefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtre dttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepkfguohcuufgthhhimhhmvghluceoihguohhstghhsehiugho shgthhdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdffkeekfeduffevgeeujeffjefhte fgueeugfevtdeiheduueeukefhudehleetnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfr rghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepihguohhstghhsehiughoshgthhdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 06:51:40 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 13:51:38 +0300 From: Ido Schimmel To: Po-Hsu Lin Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, petrm@nvidia.co, oleksandr.mazur@plvision.eu, idosch@nvidia.com, jiri@nvidia.com, nikolay@nvidia.com, gnault@redhat.com, simon.horman@netronome.com, baowen.zheng@corigine.com, danieller@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/net: Use kselftest skip code for skipped tests Message-ID: References: <20210823085854.40216-1-po-hsu.lin@canonical.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210823085854.40216-1-po-hsu.lin@canonical.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 04:58:54PM +0800, Po-Hsu Lin wrote: > There are several test cases in the net directory are still using > exit 0 or exit 1 when they need to be skipped. Use kselftest > framework skip code instead so it can help us to distinguish the > return status. > > Criterion to filter out what should be fixed in net directory: > grep -r "exit [01]" -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. Looks OK to me. We are running some of these selftests as part of regression, so I applied your patch and will report results tomorrow. Thanks