From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E76E1C31E5B for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 17:15:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B75D22147A for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 17:15:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1560878125; bh=41HLSU+pHqRldApbH/YXy2viTKPFa3SKgMhq3ODnJUA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=NYwmDeH57IHW2MxHuUvbzp7p9gsAcet/TMAeKL3JDmWxJvuXfyp5C32EIHAeDdRnn +igD/kSgQ1TEawBo+AR3SeO0Q1S0LN6SfaSkX2RoOvXkgwr4mFQ13v052KBVp62qRv NbNCS1zI+RuSbaKNZUMa/XfLR+TllhjMZcgqQLNE= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729319AbfFRRPU (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jun 2019 13:15:20 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:48240 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728572AbfFRRPT (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jun 2019 13:15:19 -0400 Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 940472084A; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 17:15:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1560878119; bh=41HLSU+pHqRldApbH/YXy2viTKPFa3SKgMhq3ODnJUA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=SquRO9iLmSpALXbpJPKSnE3SWGb89N1n4UiVrS+/NEoYOC6CX9VzTyfz/LNAmCZok bd2pcrvlF2fjSbHuym072/JM4914Go9f1i3NpIr7wFKsywxYgXDXzzRCexdPm+PGuP H2Fpc1bbeEzB0E0AdFj4lsgk1NHRc8VHYfdniY+o= Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 19:15:16 +0200 From: Greg KH To: David Miller Cc: willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, naresh.kamboju@linaro.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, fklassen@appneta.com Subject: Re: 4.19: udpgso_bench_tx: setsockopt zerocopy: Unknown error 524 Message-ID: <20190618171516.GA17547@kroah.com> References: <20190618161036.GA28190@kroah.com> <20190618.094759.539007481404905339.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190618.094759.539007481404905339.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: linux-kselftest-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:47:59AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Willem de Bruijn > Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 12:37:33 -0400 > > > Specific to the above test, I can add a check command testing > > setsockopt SO_ZEROCOPY return value. AFAIK kselftest has no explicit > > way to denote "skipped", so this would just return "pass". Sounds a > > bit fragile, passing success when a feature is absent. > > Especially since the feature might be absent because the 'config' > template forgot to include a necessary Kconfig option. That is what the "skip" response is for, don't return "pass" if the feature just isn't present. That lets people run tests on systems without the config option enabled as you say, or on systems without the needed userspace tools present. thanks, greg k-h