Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-149951-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 13:09:45 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>, 
	Adrian Reber <areber@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: tools/testing/selftests/clone3/clone3_set_tid.c appears to
 always pass?
Message-ID: <20240418-hiebe-bahnt-066312cb324b@brauner>
References: <20240417152222.GA1517581@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240417152222.GA1517581@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>

On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 08:22:22AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> 
> I am looking at tools/testing/selftests/clone3/clone3_set_tid.c as part
> of a patch to clean up the uses of 'return ksft_exit_...();' throughout
> the selftests (as they call exit() so they do not return) and I noticed
> that it seems to always pass even when there may have been an error?
> 
>       if (waitpid(ns_pid, &status, 0) < 0) {
>           ksft_print_msg("Child returned %s\n", strerror(errno));
>           ret = -errno;
>           goto out;
>       }
> 
>       ...
>   out:
>       ret = 0;
> 
>       return !ret ? ksft_exit_pass() : ksft_exit_fail();
>   }
> 
> Should the ret and out label positions be switched? Alternatively, it
> seems like ret and out do not have that many uses, perhaps it would just
> be better to call the ksft_exit_...() directly in their respective
> paths? I am not going to touch it as part of my patch but I felt it was
> worth reporting since it appears to have been there since the
> introduction of this test in commit 41585bbeeef9 ("selftests: add tests
> for clone3() with *set_tid").

Uh, good point. Let me Cc the original author.