lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] selftests:firmware: fixes a call to a wrong function name
From
Date
On 04/25/2018 09:26 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 09:39:02AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 7:10 AM, Jeffrin Jose T <ahiliation@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>>> This is a patch to the tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh
>>> file which fixes a bug which calls to a wrong function name,which in turn
>>> blocks the execution of certain tests.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeffrin Jose T <jeffrin@rajagiritech.edu.in>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh
>>> index 06d638e9dc62..cffdd4eb0a57 100755
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_run_tests.sh
>>> @@ -66,5 +66,5 @@ if [ -f $FW_FORCE_SYSFS_FALLBACK ]; then
>>> run_test_config_0003
>>> else
>>> echo "Running basic kernel configuration, working with your config"
>>> - run_test
>>> + run_tests
>>> fi
>>
>> I find it confusing that run_tests() uses $1 and $2 but later ignores
>> them unless -f $FW_FORCE_SYSFS_FALLBACK, which is checked at both the
>> top level and in proc_set_*_fallback()... I'd expected the test to
>> happen only in run_tests() and have it removed from from
>> proc_set_*_fallback().
>>
>> Regardless, the above patch is correct to run the tests. :)
>
> Thanks, I'll go queue this up.
>
> greg k-h
>

Thanks. This probably has dependency on firmware tree.

Acked-by: Shuah Khan (Samsung OSG) <shuah@kernel.org>

-- Shuah

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-25 17:31    [W:0.068 / U:14.416 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site