On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 1:39 PM Greg KH gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 01:27:14PM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 1:15 PM Greg KH gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:47:59AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
From: Willem de Bruijn willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 12:37:33 -0400
Specific to the above test, I can add a check command testing setsockopt SO_ZEROCOPY return value. AFAIK kselftest has no explicit way to denote "skipped", so this would just return "pass". Sounds a bit fragile, passing success when a feature is absent.
Especially since the feature might be absent because the 'config' template forgot to include a necessary Kconfig option.
That is what the "skip" response is for, don't return "pass" if the feature just isn't present. That lets people run tests on systems without the config option enabled as you say, or on systems without the needed userspace tools present.
I was not aware that kselftest had this feature.
But it appears that exit code KSFT_SKIP (4) will achieve this. Okay, I'll send a patch and will keep that in mind for future tests.
Wonderful, thanks for doing that!
One complication: an exit code works for a single test, but here multiple test variants are run from a single shell script.
I see that in similar such cases that use the test harness (ksft_test_result_skip) the overall test returns success as long as all individual cases return either success or skip.
I think it's preferable to return KSFT_SKIP if any of the cases did so (and none returned an error). I'll do that unless anyone objects.