Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests/net: calibrate txtimestamp

[Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>]

Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:27:34 -0500 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > +1 I also think we should run and ignore failure. I was wondering if we
> > > can swap FAIL for XFAIL in those cases:
> > > 
> > > tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h
> > > #define KSFT_XFAIL 2
> > > 
> > > Documentation/dev-tools/ktap.rst
> > > - "XFAIL", which indicates that a test is expected to fail. This
> > >   is similar to "TODO", above, and is used by some kselftest tests.
> > > 
> > > IDK if that's a stretch or not. Or we can just return PASS with 
> > > a comment?  
> > 
> > Flaky tests will then report both pass and expected fail. That might
> > add noise to https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/flakes.html?
> > 
> > I initially considered returning skipped on timing failure. But that
> > has the same issue.
> > 
> > So perhaps just return pass?
> > 
> > 
> > Especially for flaky tests sometimes returning pass and sometimes
> > returning expected to fa red/green
> > dash such as 
> 
> Right, we only have pass / fail / skip. (I put the "warn" result in for
> tests migrated from patchwork so ignore its existence for tests.)
> 
> We already treat XFAIL in KTAP as "pass". TCP-AO's key-managemeent_ipv6
> test for example already reports XFAIL:

Ok perfect. Then I'll do the same.
 
> # ok 15 # XFAIL listen() after current/rnext keys set: the socket has current/rn
> ext keys: 100:200
> 
> Skips look somewhat similar in KTAP, "ok $number # SKIP" but we fish
> those out specifically to catch skips. Any other "ok .... # comment"
> KTAP result is treated as a "pass" right now.