On Wed, 01 Jul 2020 23:44:07 +0200 Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > When a user selects a non-existing test the summary is printed with > indication 0 for all info types, and shell "success" (EXIT_SUCCESS) is > indicated. This can be understood by a human end-user, but for shell > scripting is it useful to indicate a shell failure (EXIT_FAILURE). > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c > index 54fa5fa688ce..da70a4f72f54 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c > @@ -687,5 +687,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) > free_str_set(&env.subtest_selector.whitelist); > free(env.subtest_selector.num_set); > > + if (env.succ_cnt + env.fail_cnt + env.skip_cnt == 0) > + return EXIT_FAILURE; We should use another return code as indication, else the shell script cannot tell the difference between no-test-selected and failed-test. Normally I would request a V4 (from myself I guess), but this have already been merged, so I'll send a followup patch. > + > return env.fail_cnt ? EXIT_FAILURE : EXIT_SUCCESS; > } > -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
