On 2025-12-20 23:00, Chunyu Hu wrote:
When the first test failed, and the hugetlb test passed, the result would
be pass, but we expect a fail. Fix this issue by returning fail if either
is not KSFT_PASS.
CC: Luiz Capitulino <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Chunyu Hu <[email protected]>
---
tools/testing/selftests/mm/va_high_addr_switch.c | 10 +++++++---
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/va_high_addr_switch.c
b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/va_high_addr_switch.c
index 02f290a69132..51401e081b20 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/va_high_addr_switch.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/va_high_addr_switch.c
@@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ static int supported_arch(void)
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
- int ret;
+ int ret, hugetlb_ret = KSFT_PASS;
if (!supported_arch())
return KSFT_SKIP;
@@ -331,6 +331,10 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
ret = run_test(testcases, sz_testcases);
if (argc == 2 && !strcmp(argv[1], "--run-hugetlb"))
- ret = run_test(hugetlb_testcases, sz_hugetlb_testcases);
Maybe you could just have used:
ret |= run_test(hugetlb_testcases, sz_hugetlb_testcases);
But anyways, as this is just testing code:
Reviewed-by: Luiz Capitulino <[email protected]>
- return ret;
+ hugetlb_ret = run_test(hugetlb_testcases, sz_hugetlb_testcases);
+
+ if (ret == KSFT_PASS && hugetlb_ret == KSFT_PASS)
+ return KSFT_PASS;
+ else
+ return KSFT_FAIL;
}
