Re: [PATCH] lib: kunit: add test_min_heap test conversion to KUnit

[Vitor Massaru Iha <vitor@massaru.org>]

Hi Peter,

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:23 AM <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 10:46:21AM -0300, Vitor Massaru Iha wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 10:25 AM <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 06:57:17PM -0300, Vitor Massaru Iha wrote:
> > >
> > > > The results can be seen this way:
> > > >
> > > > This is an excerpt from the test.log with the result in TAP format:
> > > > [snip]
> > > > ok 5 - example
> > > >     # Subtest: min-heap
> > > >     1..6
> > > >     ok 1 - test_heapify_all_true
> > > >     ok 2 - test_heapify_all_false
> > > >     ok 3 - test_heap_push_true
> > > >     ok 4 - test_heap_push_false
> > > >     ok 5 - test_heap_pop_push_true
> > > >     ok 6 - test_heap_pop_push_false
> > > > [snip]
>
> So ^ is TAP format?

Yep, you can see the spec here: https://testanything.org/tap-specification.html

>
> > > I don't care or care to use either; what does dmesg do? It used to be
> > > that just building the self-tests was sufficient and any error would
> > > show in dmesg when you boot the machine.
> > >
> > > But if I now have to use some damn tool, this is a regression.
> >
> > If you don't want to, you don't need to use the kunit-tool. If you
> > compile the tests as builtin and run the Kernel on your machine
> > the test result will be shown in dmesg in TAP format.
>
> That's seems a lot more verbose than it is now. I've recently even done
> a bunch of tests that don't print anything on success, dmesg is clutter
> enough already.

What tests do you refer to?

Running the test_min_heap.c, I got this from dmesg:

min_heap_test: test passed

And running min_heap_kunit.c:

ok 1 - min-heap

BR,
Vitor