On 2024-02-23 at 13:18:32 -0800, Reinette Chatre wrote: >Hi Maciej, > >On 2/22/2024 4:07 AM, Maciej Wieczor-Retman wrote: >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c >> index 161f5365b4f0..bae08d1221ec 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl_tests.c >> @@ -134,6 +134,8 @@ static void run_single_test(const struct resctrl_test *test, const struct user_p >> } >> >> ret = test->run_test(test, uparams); >> + if (test->cleanup) >> + test->cleanup(); >> ksft_test_result(!ret, "%s: test\n", test->name); >> >> cleanup: > >I think this can be potentially confusing to do cleanup here and >then follow it with a test_cleanup(). Could this test specific >cleanup perhaps be called from the general test_cleanup() instead? Sure, that should look nicer, thanks! > >Reinette -- Kind regards Maciej Wieczór-Retman
