Hi Ilpo,
On 12/14/2023 2:12 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2023, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>
>> Hi Ilpo,
>>
>> On 12/11/2023 4:17 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>>> The resctrl selftest code contains a number of perror() calls. Some of
>>> them come with hash character and some don't. The kselftest framework
>>> provides ksft_perror() that is compatible with test output formatting
>>> so it should be used instead of adding custom hash signs.
>>>
>>> Some perror() calls are too far away from anything that sets error.
>>> For those call sites, ksft_print_msg() must be used instead.
>>>
>>> Convert perror() to ksft_perror() or ksft_print_msg().
>>>
>>> Other related changes:
>>> - Remove hash signs
>>> - Remove trailing stops & newlines from ksft_perror()
>>> - Add terminating newlines for converted ksft_print_msg()
>>> - Use consistent capitalization
>>>
>>
>> Another great cleanup. Also thanks for fixing some non-sensical messages.
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ int cat_perf_miss_val(int cpu_no, int n, char *cache_type)
>>> param.num_of_runs = 0;
>>>
>>> if (pipe(pipefd)) {
>>> - perror("# Unable to create pipe");
>>> + ksft_perror("Unable to create pipe");
>>> return errno;
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ int cat_perf_miss_val(int cpu_no, int n, char *cache_type)
>>> * Just print the error message.
>>> * Let while(1) run and wait for itself to be killed.
>>> */
>>> - perror("# failed signaling parent process");
>>> + ksft_perror("Failed signaling parent process");
>>>
>>
>> Partial writes are not actually errors and it cannot be expected that errno be set
>> in these cases. In these cases I think ksft_print_msg() would be more appropriate.
>
> I can change those to use print instead although I don't think these will
> fail for other reasons than a real error as the pipe should be empty and
> only single byte is written to it.
>
Apologies, I did not pay attention to the actual size of the message. Yes,
leaving it as ksft_perror() is reasonable.
Reinette
