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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 8CDDEC433DF for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 00:07:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CF4F205ED for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 00:07:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732815AbgENAHn (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2020 20:07:43 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:17286 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732806AbgENAHm (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2020 20:07:42 -0400 IronPort-SDR: z/6vuvIViRMyvbC+kLOySFnhZ/R1tzJ1FHmDLeTRMl2R+9FF32NqzaRCYUk8QnBcXth1U9QnoZ nBMSOEhDCQbw== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 May 2020 17:07:42 -0700 IronPort-SDR: r23TCOmpYyBRXSN97kdMe6MfL0xgxBWDDDYDKtee2AuwtM8fg5/bX9Fz5Z3Uc6u6Xge7rBl/CI nvJtSTeH+qdQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,389,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="280675048" Received: from gliber-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.249.38.41]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 May 2020 17:07:37 -0700 Message-ID: <90215c3c313a926267abf66dcfa175dd10f6bc5c.camel@linux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/tpm: Fix runtime error From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Nikita Sobolev , Shuah Khan Cc: "linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org" , Tadeusz Struk , open list , Peter Huewe , Jason Gunthorpe , Alexey Brodkin , Eugeniy Paltsev Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 03:07:35 +0300 In-Reply-To: References: <20200412141118.70688-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.1-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kselftest-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2020-05-10 at 18:44 +0000, Nikita Sobolev wrote: > Hi, Jarkko Sakkinen, all! > > Thank you for your notes about commit and sorry for not copying the message > to you! It's not a biggie, no worries. > There is definitely unwanted line of code in the commit. > After deleting that one, introduced changes work fine. > > There is a hardcoded usage of /dev/tpm2 in the kernel selftest. And if there > is no such device - test fails. I believe this is not a behavior, that we > expect. Test should be skipped in such case, should it? That is what my > commit makes. > > So, after deleting unwanted line of code and making cosmetic changes (new description + deleting > excess newline character), can commit be submitted again? > > You also mentioned reviewed-by nor tested-by tags in your message. Who should make these tags? > > P.S. > Also there was a question: why do I declare exit code with a constant instead of just exit 4. > I chose this style because it is used in other kernel selftests for such kind of checks. > It is proper to follow common style rules. Should I argument this decision in commit message? > > -Nikita Yes, you are of course free to submit a new patch for review. /Jarkko