Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] lib/test_sysctl: support testing of sysctl. boot parameter

[Vlastimil Babka]

On 5/11/20 8:31 PM, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 01:05:22PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> ----8<----
>> From a999e993a89e521b152bbd4b1466f69e62879c30 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx>
>> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 12:59:49 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] lib/test_sysctl: support testing of sysctl. boot parameter -
>>  fix
>> 
>> Skip the new test if boot_int sysctl is not present, otherwise, per Luis,
>> "This would fail if someone uses this script to test an older kernel, and
>> the scripts in selftests are supposed to work with older kernels."
>> 
>> Suggested-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  tools/testing/selftests/sysctl/sysctl.sh | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/sysctl/sysctl.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/sysctl/sysctl.sh
>> index ef6417b8067b..148704f465b5 100755
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/sysctl/sysctl.sh
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/sysctl/sysctl.sh
>> @@ -756,6 +756,11 @@ sysctl_test_0006()
> 
> You want to:
> 
>                                                                                 
> # Kselftest framework requirement - SKIP code is 4.                             
> ksft_skip=4 
> 
>>  sysctl_test_0007()
>>  {
>>  	TARGET="${SYSCTL}/boot_int"
>> +	if [ ! -f $TARGET ]; then
>> +		echo "Skipping test for $TARGET as it is not present ..."
>> +		return 0
>> +	fi
> 
> And return 4 instead.

If I return it from the function, nobody will care, AFAICS. If I 'exit
$ksft_skip', is that correct if it's just a single test out of 7? What's the
proper way?

Thanks

>   Luis
>> +
>>  	if [ -d $DIR ]; then
>>  		echo "Boot param test only possible sysctl_test is built-in, not module:"
>>  		cat $TEST_DIR/config >&2
>> -- 
>> 2.26.2
>> 
>