Message ID | 20200707101936.12052-1-pbonzini@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | selftests: pidfd: prefer ksft_test_result_skip to ksft_exit_* | expand |
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 06:19:34AM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Calling ksft_exit_* results in executing fewer tests than planned, which > is wrong for ksft_exit_skip or suboptimal (because it results in a bail > out) for ksft_exit_fail_msg. > > Using ksft_test_result_skip instead skips only one test and lets the > test plan proceed as promised by ksft_set_plan. > > Paolo Thanks for fixing this, Paolo! Acked-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> Shuah, want me to take it or do you want to take it?
On 7/7/20 7:52 AM, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 06:19:34AM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Calling ksft_exit_* results in executing fewer tests than planned, which >> is wrong for ksft_exit_skip or suboptimal (because it results in a bail >> out) for ksft_exit_fail_msg. >> >> Using ksft_test_result_skip instead skips only one test and lets the >> test plan proceed as promised by ksft_set_plan. >> >> Paolo > > Thanks for fixing this, Paolo! > Acked-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> > > Shuah, want me to take it or do you want to take it? > I will apply it to my tree with Paolo's other patches in this series. thanks, -- Shuah