On 7/1/24 2:14 PM, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> On 2024-07-01, Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Adding more people for review
>>
>> On 5/23/24 2:46 AM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>>> Don't print that 88 sub-tests are going to be executed. But then skip.
>>> The error is printed that executed test was only 1 while 88 should have
>>> run:
>>>
>>> Old output:
>>> TAP version 13
>>> 1..88
>>> ok 2 # SKIP all tests require euid == 0
>>> # Planned tests != run tests (88 != 1)
>>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:0 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:1 error:0
>>>
>>> New and correct output:
>>> TAP version 13
>>> 1..0 # SKIP all tests require euid == 0
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> tools/testing/selftests/openat2/resolve_test.c | 5 +++--
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/resolve_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/resolve_test.c
>>> index bbafad440893c..5472ec478d227 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/resolve_test.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/resolve_test.c
>>> @@ -508,12 +508,13 @@ void test_openat2_opath_tests(void)
>>> int main(int argc, char **argv)
>>> {
>>> ksft_print_header();
>>> - ksft_set_plan(NUM_TESTS);
>>>
>>> /* NOTE: We should be checking for CAP_SYS_ADMIN here... */
>>> - if (geteuid() != 0)
>>> + if (geteuid())
>
> This change isn't necessary, != 0 makes what we're checking clearer.
It is wasteful to write != 0 when you can achieve the same without it.
I can update the patch by removing it. Please can you provide a reviewed-by
tag for remaining patch?
>
>>> ksft_exit_skip("all tests require euid == 0\n");
>>>
>>> + ksft_set_plan(NUM_TESTS);
>>> +
>>> test_openat2_opath_tests();
>>>
>>> if (ksft_get_fail_cnt() + ksft_get_error_cnt() > 0)
>>
>> --
>> BR,
>> Muhammad Usama Anjum
>
--
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum
