Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: firmware: Add details in error logging

[Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>]

On 7/14/25 15:26, Harshal wrote:
> Specify details in logs of failed cases

How about changing the above to:

Improve error messages adding details on failuires

> 
> Signed-off-by: Harshal <embedkari167@gmail.com>
> ---
> v2:
> - revert back to exit() instead of die() to avoid modifying system behaviour
> 
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/c7c071ed-6a4e-4a9c-ba9d-c745fd42c22f@linuxfoundation.org/
>   tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_namespace.c | 14 +++++++-------
>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_namespace.c b/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_namespace.c
> index 04757dc7e546..5b0032498ede 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_namespace.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_namespace.c
> @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ static void trigger_fw(const char *fw_name, const char *sys_path)
>   
>   	fd = open(sys_path, O_WRONLY);
>   	if (fd < 0)
> -		die("open failed: %s\n",
> +		die("open of sys_path failed: %s\n",

Why not just use sys_path as a input parameter to die()?

>   		    strerror(errno));
>   	if (write(fd, fw_name, strlen(fw_name)) != strlen(fw_name))
>   		exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
> @@ -52,10 +52,10 @@ static void setup_fw(const char *fw_path)
>   
>   	fd = open(fw_path, O_WRONLY | O_CREAT, 0600);
>   	if (fd < 0)
> -		die("open failed: %s\n",
> +		die("open of firmware file failed: %s\n",

Why not just use fw_path as a input parameter to die()?

>   		    strerror(errno));
>   	if (write(fd, fw, sizeof(fw) -1) != sizeof(fw) -1)
> -		die("write failed: %s\n",
> +		die("write to firmware file failed: %s\n",

Same here

>   		    strerror(errno));
>   	close(fd);
>   }
> @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ static bool test_fw_in_ns(const char *fw_name, const char *sys_path, bool block_
>   
>   	if (block_fw_in_parent_ns)
>   		if (mount("test", "/lib/firmware", "tmpfs", MS_RDONLY, NULL) == -1)
> -			die("blocking firmware in parent ns failed\n");
> +			die("blocking firmware in parent namespace failed\n");
>   
>   	child = fork();
>   	if (child == -1) {
> @@ -99,11 +99,11 @@ static bool test_fw_in_ns(const char *fw_name, const char *sys_path, bool block_
>   			strerror(errno));
>   	}
>   	if (mount(NULL, "/", NULL, MS_SLAVE|MS_REC, NULL) == -1)
> -		die("remount root in child ns failed\n");
> +		die("remount root in child namespace failed\n");
>   
>   	if (!block_fw_in_parent_ns) {
>   		if (mount("test", "/lib/firmware", "tmpfs", MS_RDONLY, NULL) == -1)
> -			die("blocking firmware in child ns failed\n");
> +			die("blocking firmware in child namespace failed\n");
>   	} else
>   		umount("/lib/firmware");
>   
> @@ -129,8 +129,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>   		die("error: failed to build full fw_path\n");
>   
>   	setup_fw(fw_path);
> -

Why did you remove this line?

>   	setvbuf(stdout, NULL, _IONBF, 0);
> +

Why is this line added

>   	/* Positive case: firmware in PID1 mount namespace */
>   	printf("Testing with firmware in parent namespace (assumed to be same file system as PID1)\n");
>   	if (!test_fw_in_ns(fw_name, sys_path, false))

The rest looks good to me.

thanks,
-- Shuah