From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtpout-03.galae.net (smtpout-03.galae.net [185.246.85.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 356A52FFF9D for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 07:45:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.246.85.4 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760600760; cv=none; b=MZLf5kmw6gyhwac+wpXc2UnskrRwdZ1VRqDcRueHVzs8amK3HVDSKv4bJHAL5erELIHCVTlQLtjkmiqroaNEx4wLmHPqyxwOf7iZBh8F4PwP6DiD7AKPD3KCzqRdZO/iSxPUJnHBhxrUGyxvqjZJ3aEhrGcqAi0aKHws4+LyWDA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760600760; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NmnFd273B1++/96Wgc9NGu0f7rRSh30SrDhu6B794fM=; h=From:Date:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-Id:References: In-Reply-To:To:Cc; b=NNxxfXjQSVkcxFLDqdI4hkVDNW74sityZzxb0ZZvBNWmNUOL/6lnSXk9M2RE14FJmdxiFlXsBDPniol9oMhw7mdYwVCMzBASWP1kptjMS3QeuQ+Gn7WhhyDfKvtPg+ASnMZdf8p0/CUwFaUGHBPjKt272X8AS2xDHCSZlutfa5A= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=SIrod47S; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.246.85.4 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="SIrod47S" Received: from smtpout-01.galae.net (smtpout-01.galae.net [212.83.139.233]) by smtpout-03.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB5E94E410F6; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 07:45:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.galae.net (mail.galae.net [212.83.136.155]) by smtpout-01.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F6DD6062C; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 07:45:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id 23CB2102F22AA; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 09:45:51 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=dkim; t=1760600753; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references; bh=t78orrvBumS1q2Y+FbZ/Ic91n45UYCSTBLa81LdYwMs=; b=SIrod47Sr/jeNrtmvivifXwVasCFlg8csihjmd+ho/c+fAsSqqlY9kG1BZDdwmIgdOfJkp PcxieL7soK5JaJIZ8xGE0gbmIfm8qh2V78S+mptskvgrktNu4S7qZ3uwKpUP28mgyftfaL i32z0D/O0z2BdVFiteYpbodRhbAeLbAZbmXFwx7TFVrBn75m12w/f+xr5rcRRD/s62UW9t 4kv8odW0AstAEUwSYRkjHB9/FsM23WSs13/XA7cXIqkhj2qcefllVX8RufSSsn2ZQkBvp6 Nv78hHY4e5cX6NwspDLbUSBh+EjSqgBzK1qg6SWnQxNz1lrgRWMPhyQpVugrSQ== From: "Bastien Curutchet (eBPF Foundation)" Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 09:45:32 +0200 Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v5 03/15] selftests/bpf: test_xsk: Fix __testapp_validate_traffic()'s return value Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20251016-xsk-v5-3-662c95eb8005@bootlin.com> References: <20251016-xsk-v5-0-662c95eb8005@bootlin.com> In-Reply-To: <20251016-xsk-v5-0-662c95eb8005@bootlin.com> To: =?utf-8?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?= , Magnus Karlsson , Maciej Fijalkowski , Jonathan Lemon , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Eduard Zingerman , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Stanislav Fomichev , Hao Luo , Jiri Olsa , Mykola Lysenko , Shuah Khan , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Jesper Dangaard Brouer Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Alexis Lothore , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Bastien Curutchet (eBPF Foundation)" X-Mailer: b4 0.14.2 X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 __testapp_validate_traffic is supposed to return an integer value that tells if the test passed (0), failed (-1) or was skiped (2). It actually returns a boolean in the end. This doesn't harm when the test is successful but can lead to misinterpretation in case of failure as 1 will be returned instead of -1. Return TEST_FAILURE (-1) in case of failure, TEST_PASS (0) otherwise. Reviewed-by: Maciej Fijalkowski Signed-off-by: Bastien Curutchet (eBPF Foundation) --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_xsk.c | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_xsk.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_xsk.c index 679491b6b9dd80ccb2b92729141fb8715b874c6d..8d7c38eb32ca3537cb019f120c3350ebd9f8c6bc 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_xsk.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_xsk.c @@ -1725,7 +1725,10 @@ static int __testapp_validate_traffic(struct test_spec *test, struct ifobject *i testapp_clean_xsk_umem(ifobj2); } - return !!test->fail; + if (test->fail) + return TEST_FAILURE; + + return TEST_PASS; } static int testapp_validate_traffic(struct test_spec *test) -- 2.51.0