Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1713522
| From | Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] selftests: timers: freq-step: Fix build warning |
| Date | 2017-08-17 06:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ufk8p-7C3-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <ueuMx-IV-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <ueIZc-1d4-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <uffBL-4VU-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <uffLr-4Z5-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <ufjP4-7vK-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 08/16/2017 09:31 PM, John Stultz wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:10 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com> wrote: >>> Hi John, >>> >>> On 08/15/2017 06:11 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: >>>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 02:01:36PM -0700, John Stultz wrote: >>>>> Fixes the following build warning: >>>>> freq-step.c: In function ‘main’: >>>>> freq-step.c:271:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type] >>>> >>>>> @@ -268,4 +268,6 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) >>>>> ksft_exit_fail(); >>> >>> This needs to be changes as well to return ksft_exit_fail(); >>>>> >>>>> ksft_exit_pass(); >>>>> + >>>>> + return 0; >>>>> } >>>> >>>> It seems most tests use "return ksft_exit_pass();". Would that be >>>> preferred over separate return? I don't have a preference. >>> >>> Let's go with "return ksft_exit_pass();" >> >> Thanks for the review, I've made both changes and I'll send these out >> shortly with the rest of my 4.14 focused queue. > > Shuah, > One more question here. I'm noticing that running "make > run_destructive_tests" in the timers dir, the freq-step test returns > ksft_exit_skip, which results in the test returning an exit code of 4, > which causes make to think it failed, halting the testing. I think exit code 4 might not be good option. It could be tripping the make target rules. > > I'm guessing there is some extra logic for how to properly run > extended tests such that the various error codes are handled and a > skip doesn't result in the test stopping? > > Any suggestions/pointers? > Skip is really a case of not being able to run the test and it might not be necessary to differentiate SKIP vs. PASS. I think we can just get rid of EXIT_SKIP and use EXIT_PASS. I would rather do that than adding handling for exit code 4. I can get that change in for 4.14-rc1 if this can wait or I will try to get that into 4.13-rc7 possibly. Also just FYI - I am going to send out patch series for timers test conversion to TAP13 tomorrow. thanks, -- Shuah
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC][PATCH 2/2] selftests: timers: freq-step: Fix build warning John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org> - 2017-08-14 23:10 +0200
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] selftests: timers: freq-step: Fix build warning Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> - 2017-08-15 14:20 +0200
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] selftests: timers: freq-step: Fix build warning Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com> - 2017-08-17 01:10 +0200
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] selftests: timers: freq-step: Fix build warning John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org> - 2017-08-17 01:20 +0200
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] selftests: timers: freq-step: Fix build warning John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org> - 2017-08-17 05:40 +0200
Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] selftests: timers: freq-step: Fix build warning Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com> - 2017-08-17 06:00 +0200
csiph-web