On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 6:44 PM David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 14:58:26 -0400 > > > I see that in similar such cases that use the test harness > > (ksft_test_result_skip) the overall test returns success as long as > > all individual cases return either success or skip. > > > > I think it's preferable to return KSFT_SKIP if any of the cases did so > > (and none returned an error). I'll do that unless anyone objects. > > I guess this is a question of semantics. > > I mean, if you report skip at the top level does that mean that all > sub tests were skipped? People may think so... :) Yes, it's not ideal. Erring on the side of caution? Unlike pass, it is a signal that an admin may or may not choose to act on. I run a selected subset of tests from tools/testing that are all expected to pass, so if one returns skip, I would want to take a closer look.
