On 12/12/18 19:04, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 20:56:06 +0900, Alice Ferrazzi wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Alice Ferrazzi <alice.ferra...@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_offload.py | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_offload.py
>> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_offload.py
>> index 0f9130ebfd2c..b06cc0eea0eb 100755
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_offload.py
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_offload.py
>> @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ def cmd_result(proc, include_stderr=False, fail=False):
>>
>>
>> def rm(f):
>> - cmd("rm -f %s" % (f))
>> + cmd("rm -f %s" % f)
>> if f in files:
>> files.remove(f)
>>
> Is this in PEP8, too?
I don't know, but it shouldn't be.
If f is a sequence type, both the old and new code can break here,
throwing a TypeError. It should be cmd("rm -f %s" % (f,)). The
presence of the brackets suggests to me that that's what the
original author intended.
Now, it's unlikely that we'd ever want to pass a list or tuple
here, since 'rm' wouldn't understand the result, but the proper
way to deal with that is an assertion with a meaningful message,
since the TypeError here will have the non-obvious message "not
all arguments converted during string formatting".
-Ed
