Date:   Wed, 17 Nov 2021 06:05:35 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Davide Caratti <dcaratti@redhat.com>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>
Cc:     Li Zhijian <zhijianx.li@intel.com>, shuah@kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lkp@intel.com, philip.li@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] selftests/tc-testing: add exit code
Message-ID: <20211117060535.1d47295a@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
In-Reply-To: <YZTDcjv4ZPXv8Oaz@dcaratti.users.ipa.redhat.com>
References: <20211117054517.31847-1-zhijianx.li@intel.com>
        <YZTDcjv4ZPXv8Oaz@dcaratti.users.ipa.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 17 Nov 2021 09:55:14 +0100 Davide Caratti wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 01:45:15PM +0800, Li Zhijian wrote:
> > Mark the summary result as FAIL to prevent from confusing the selftest
> > framework if some of them are failed.
> > 
> > Previously, the selftest framework always treats it as *ok* even though
> > some of them are failed actually. That's because the script tdc.sh always
> > return 0.  
> 
> yes, also tdc was lacking support for KSFT_SKIP for a long time.

Should this go via netdev? Is the risk of conflicts low enough 
so it doesn't matter?

We should probably add a MAINTAINERS entry for tdc. Adding Jamal.