Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] selftests: kselftest_harness: return Kselftest Skip code for skipped tests | From | Shuah Khan <> | Date | Thu, 14 Jun 2018 10:02:15 -0600 |
| |
On 06/13/2018 10:06 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 6:34 PM, Shuah Khan (Samsung OSG) > <shuah@kernel.org> wrote: >> When a test is skipped because of unmet dependencies and/or unsupported >> configuration, kselftest_harness exits with error which is treated as a >> fail by the Kselftest framework. This leads to false negative result even >> when the test could not be run. >> >> Change it to return kselftest skip code when a test gets skipped to >> clearly report that the test could not be run. This change add skip >> handling to kselftest_harness with minimal changes adding a new skipped >> field to struct __test_metadata and using it to recognize KSFT_SKIP exit >> from the test function (t->fn) to __run_test() to the test_harness_run() >> to return the right skip code to Kselftest framework. >> >> Kselftest framework SKIP code is 4 and the framework prints appropriate >> messages to indicate that the test is skipped. > > Unfortunately this will not work: test step # is used as the failure > code to let test runners know where a child failed. KSFT_SKIP is 4, so > every test failing in step 4 would be seen as a skip instead of a > fail. >
Yeah. That is correct. __bail() does exit with step which could be step #4
> Tests must not exit on their own with this harness: only the existing > ASSERT/EXPECT macros can be used. uevent test should never be doing > this: > > if (geteuid()) { > TH_LOG("Uevent filtering tests require root > privileges. Skipping test"); > _exit(KSFT_SKIP); > } > > Nor the _exit(EXIT_FAILURE) calls. Those must all be ASSERT() instead.
It did look like an improper use of the harness by this test. Okay that makes sense.
> > Perhaps a new signal could be used, but the return codes are already being used. >
A a new harness hook for KSFT_SKIP case so tests can call that explicitly would solve the problem once the problem of conflict with step #4.
Since he harness step metadata doesn't have special meaning than keeping track of how far test ran, harness could be changed to treat step #4 as a special value and not use it for step to solve the conflict between ksft and kselftest_harness.
thanks, -- Shuah
| |