From: Donggeun Yoo <donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
eddyz87@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com, martin.lau@linux.dev,
song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, jolsa@kernel.org,
emil@etsalapatis.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 2/2] selftests/bpf: Test per-cpu initialization of a BPF_F_CPU created element
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:21:05 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260920102105.445051-1-donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260920095859.635921F000FF@smtp.kernel.org>
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 09:58:58 +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> [Severity: Medium]
> Does this force a hard failure on uniprocessor systems instead of correctly
> skipping the test?
>
> Since UP is a valid hardware configuration for running selftests, if a test
> requires multiple CPUs, shouldn't it gracefully skip using test__skip()
> rather than asserting a failure?
Right, that is a bug in the test. With one possible CPU there is no second
CPU that could hold a stale value, so the case this subtest exists for
cannot occur; booted with -smp 1, all three of the new subtests fail rather
than skip. I will use test__skip() in v2.
> [Severity: Low]
> This isn't a bug, but the BPF subsystem strictly requires multi-line comments
> to have the opening /* on its own line. Could this be reformatted to match
> the required style?
It is not a requirement, but it is the documented preference, so I will
follow it. Commit 82b8000c28b5 ("net: drop special comment style") removed
the netdev comment rule, which leaves the general preference in
Documentation/process/coding-style.rst, and that is the form you describe.
checkpatch checks neither form. I will reformat the comment in v2.
Thanks,
Donggeun
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-20 10:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-20 9:31 [PATCH bpf 0/2] bpf: fix per-cpu initialization of a BPF_F_CPU created hash element Donggeun Yoo
2026-09-20 9:31 ` [PATCH bpf 1/2] bpf: Zero-fill other CPUs when BPF_F_CPU creates a per-cpu " Donggeun Yoo
2026-09-20 10:19 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-20 10:29 ` Donggeun Yoo
2026-09-20 16:21 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-09-20 9:31 ` [PATCH bpf 2/2] selftests/bpf: Test per-cpu initialization of a BPF_F_CPU created element Donggeun Yoo
[not found] ` <20260920095859.635921F000FF@smtp.kernel.org>
2026-09-20 10:21 ` Donggeun Yoo [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260920102105.445051-1-donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com \
--to=donggeunyoo.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®