| Message ID | 20211118065723.2808020-1-jk@codeconstruct.com.au (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | f6ef47e5bdc6f652176e433b02317fc83049f8d7 |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [net-next] mctp/test: Update refcount checking in route fragment tests | expand |
Hello: This patch was applied to netdev/net-next.git (master) by David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>: On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 14:57:23 +0800 you wrote: > In 99ce45d5e, we moved a route refcount decrement from > mctp_do_fragment_route into the caller. This invalidates the assumption > that the route test makes about refcount behaviour, so the route tests > fail. > > This change fixes the test case to suit the new refcount behaviour. > > [...] Here is the summary with links: - [net-next] mctp/test: Update refcount checking in route fragment tests https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/f6ef47e5bdc6 You are awesome, thank you!
diff --git a/net/mctp/test/route-test.c b/net/mctp/test/route-test.c index 36fac3daf86a..86ad15abf897 100644 --- a/net/mctp/test/route-test.c +++ b/net/mctp/test/route-test.c @@ -150,11 +150,6 @@ static void mctp_test_fragment(struct kunit *test) rt = mctp_test_create_route(&init_net, NULL, 10, mtu); KUNIT_ASSERT_TRUE(test, rt); - /* The refcount would usually be incremented as part of a route lookup, - * but we're setting the route directly here. - */ - refcount_inc(&rt->rt.refs); - rc = mctp_do_fragment_route(&rt->rt, skb, mtu, MCTP_TAG_OWNER); KUNIT_EXPECT_FALSE(test, rc);
In 99ce45d5e, we moved a route refcount decrement from mctp_do_fragment_route into the caller. This invalidates the assumption that the route test makes about refcount behaviour, so the route tests fail. This change fixes the test case to suit the new refcount behaviour. Fixes: 99ce45d5e7db ("mctp: Implement extended addressing") Signed-off-by: Jeremy Kerr <jk@codeconstruct.com.au> --- net/mctp/test/route-test.c | 5 ----- 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)