Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf test: Fix exit code for record+probe_libc_inet_pton.sh | From | Sandipan Das <> | Date | Mon, 12 Mar 2018 22:23:26 +0530 |
| |
On 03/12/2018 06:35 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 06:14:50PM +0530, Sandipan Das wrote: >> This fixes record+probe_libc_inet_pton.sh from always exiting >> with code 0 and making the test pass even if the perf script >> output does not match the expected pattern. >> >> The issue can be observed if this test is run with the verbose >> flags as shown below: >> >> 60: probe libc's inet_pton & backtrace it with ping : >> ... >> ping 19602 [006] 16988.413767: probe_libc:inet_pton: (7fff9a2c42e8) >> 1842e8 __GI___inet_pton (/usr/lib64/libc-2.26.so) >> 130db4 getaddrinfo (/usr/lib64/libc-2.26.so) >> >> FAIL: expected backtrace entry 3 ".*\(.*/bin/ping.*\)$" got "" >> test child finished with 0 >> ... >> probe libc's inet_pton & backtrace it with ping: Ok >> >> Fixes: e07d585e2454 ("perf tests: Switch trace+probe_libc_inet_pton to use record") >> Signed-off-by: Sandipan Das <sandipan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> --- >> tools/perf/tests/shell/record+probe_libc_inet_pton.sh | 5 ++++- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/shell/record+probe_libc_inet_pton.sh b/tools/perf/tests/shell/record+probe_libc_inet_pton.sh >> index 52c3ee701a89..1ecc1f0ff84a 100755 >> --- a/tools/perf/tests/shell/record+probe_libc_inet_pton.sh >> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/shell/record+probe_libc_inet_pton.sh >> @@ -47,7 +47,10 @@ trace_libc_inet_pton_backtrace() { >> [ -z "${expected[$idx]}" ] && break >> done >> >> - rm -f $file >> + # If any statements are executed from this point onwards, >> + # the exit code of the last among these will be reflected >> + # in err below. If the exit code is 0, the test will pass >> + # even if the perf script output does not match. > > right :-\ but we still need to delete that $file.. I assume it will > get delete by the 'rm -f ${file}' in the script main body? > > thanks, > jirka > >
Yes, that deletes $file.
-- With Regards, Sandipan
| |