Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/4] lib/tst_kconfig: Modify the return type of tst_kconfig_check function

[Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>]

Hi!
> diff --git a/lib/tst_kconfig.c b/lib/tst_kconfig.c
> index d433b8cf6..dc7decff9 100644
> --- a/lib/tst_kconfig.c
> +++ b/lib/tst_kconfig.c
> @@ -478,22 +478,26 @@ static void dump_vars(const struct tst_expr *expr)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -void tst_kconfig_check(const char *const kconfigs[])
> +int tst_kconfig_check(const char *const kconfigs[])
>  {
>  	size_t expr_cnt = array_len(kconfigs);
>  	struct tst_expr *exprs[expr_cnt];
>  	unsigned int i, var_cnt;
> -	int abort_test = 0;
> +	int ret = 0;
>  
>  	for (i = 0; i < expr_cnt; i++) {
>  		exprs[i] = tst_bool_expr_parse(kconfigs[i]);
>  
> -		if (!exprs[i])
> -			tst_brk(TBROK, "Invalid kconfig expression!");
> +		if (!exprs[i]) {
> +			tst_res(TWARN, "Invalid kconfig expression!");
> +			return 1;
> +		}
>  	}
>  
> -	if (validate_vars(exprs, expr_cnt))
> -		tst_brk(TBROK, "Invalid kconfig variables!");
> +	if (validate_vars(exprs, expr_cnt)) {
> +		tst_res(TWARN, "Invalid kconfig variables!");
> +		return 1;
> +	}

I think that it would be actually better to keep the TBROK in these two
checks because neither of these two will trigger unless there is a typo
in the expressions and it makes sense to abort everything and stop in
these cases.

Other than that it looks good.

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp