From nobody Thu Oct 2 02:15:07 2025 Received: from smtpout-02.galae.net (smtpout-02.galae.net [185.246.84.56]) (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 0D1C230B534 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 14:50:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.246.84.56 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758725415; cv=none; b=ANVQdDmACBAuGrW0SF2kzz2iewWz7lIHtfr9k/VVBFy3XWVY/iLnVz38M95Lt5f+gXmE80tThpCON9udx/iGdP0IXJJKxdDaQNFMvWJ072dl9NrkLYyuC743RctMptyy7chx+E4J+L7wsZWdSrd/esRC75Sc68AYbpjYBHJtLrw= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758725415; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QntO1gbQ2O/QD7BJzXedroNY+5AyUr6I8y1Tc2DnWpc=; h=From:Date:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-Id:References: In-Reply-To:To:Cc; b=TSuAbapA3O4OQNSrcZgAxI8DM0kh8m3JrfdaPTbpipn9LSSr7mmBzDrrMAdYBqahpb4Cx8lSOptzuvZ4JhCR+o0EGg7q2Pm8rHgz7d7vh1Npl4IQBiDsEJw6T69y2e7sX5FCPjx2N1uIRjfZHAUN/yp8krTemLJ+s8xtWRXvLsE= 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=F6D5gP4Z; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.246.84.56 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="F6D5gP4Z" Received: from smtpout-01.galae.net (smtpout-01.galae.net [212.83.139.233]) by smtpout-02.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 723FA1A0F85; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 14:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.galae.net (mail.galae.net [212.83.136.155]) by smtpout-01.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41D2160634; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 14:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id B6D02102F1916; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 16:50:04 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=dkim; t=1758725407; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references; bh=r25cJKSJ2aGWddtaZ7/M8QgHMa9Wnxi3zbsK79tDlrA=; b=F6D5gP4Z8R00x6PcLAz9BBR7I2C6QEfXHApj9pUygMf9srO1z/DIzUZURM58nF/CBuY9LK jaroQXixgh9qyNAteeaGKG1gPr4tNPVsQloLZYH9pcxf7igGyQDRJ6uYIdMKQN2bRLlxEp d7bldqdtVWG9hZKkWVuDlyyKZxXKex6OJnVy9HsLEJOQfZrpcu9n8v/YVPJ433KcL6/rwD gQSjsMxnhSUBK/PTQzKMVDtx2Wu9TwiGpBAtF0X9cW+snHdxoutwoeNibXrpC6k6x9FdYZ mWHt2dB9/7xLAfkUJiiVtDOOlzvlW31jBtwoSC4uk3LZfnDH+STthZ9UQhdKhg== From: "Bastien Curutchet (eBPF Foundation)" Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 16:49:38 +0200 Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 03/15] selftests/bpf: test_xsk: Fix __testapp_validate_traffic()'s return value Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <20250924-xsk-v4-3-20e57537b876@bootlin.com> References: <20250924-xsk-v4-0-20e57537b876@bootlin.com> In-Reply-To: <20250924-xsk-v4-0-20e57537b876@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. 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/selftes= ts/bpf/test_xsk.c index 679491b6b9dd80ccb2b92729141fb8715b874c6d..8d7c38eb32ca3537cb019f120c3= 350ebd9f8c6bc 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_sp= ec *test, struct ifobject *i testapp_clean_xsk_umem(ifobj2); } =20 - return !!test->fail; + if (test->fail) + return TEST_FAILURE; + + return TEST_PASS; } =20 static int testapp_validate_traffic(struct test_spec *test) --=20 2.51.0