From: pvorel at suse.cz (Petr Vorel) Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/2] selftests: Start shell API Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 14:22:00 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20190408122159.GA4381@dell5510> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1554721562.17244.29.camel@linux.ibm.com> Hi Mimi, > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.sh > > @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ > > +#!/bin/sh > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > +# Copyright (c) 2019 Petr Vorel <pvorel at suse.cz> > > + > > +PATH="$(dirname $0):$PATH" > > + > > +KSFT_PASS=0 > > +KSFT_FAIL=1 > > +KSFT_XFAIL=2 > > +KSFT_XPASS=3 > > +KSFT_SKIP=4 > The kexec tests only defined functions for PASS, FAIL, and SKIP. What > is the difference between KSFT_FAIL and KSFT_XFAIL, and similarly > between KSFT_PASS and KSFT_XPASS? Either here or above the functions > should be a comment. I guess xfail and xpass are taken from pytest [1]. I took them from kselftest.h, in order to be somehow compatible with existing C API. But grepping code xpass is never used (not even in list of kselftest results [2]), xfail is used in about 4 tests (binderfs, ftrace, pidfd, seccomp). But I'm not a big fan of this pytest terminology "something is resulting the opposite than expected", IMHO simple pass and fail are enough. On the other hand I miss "test failed in preparation phase" (TBROK in LTP), skip has different meaning. Kind regards, Petr [1] https://docs.pytest.org/en/latest/skipping.html [2] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-kselftest/msg06651.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: pvorel@suse.cz (Petr Vorel) Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/2] selftests: Start shell API Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 14:22:00 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20190408122159.GA4381@dell5510> (raw) Message-ID: <20190408122200.0gaUwmWo2mXGAlinKM3_lcImRZElxrDvzFRMtVZlR9Q@z> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1554721562.17244.29.camel@linux.ibm.com> Hi Mimi, > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.sh > > @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ > > +#!/bin/sh > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > +# Copyright (c) 2019 Petr Vorel <pvorel at suse.cz> > > + > > +PATH="$(dirname $0):$PATH" > > + > > +KSFT_PASS=0 > > +KSFT_FAIL=1 > > +KSFT_XFAIL=2 > > +KSFT_XPASS=3 > > +KSFT_SKIP=4 > The kexec tests only defined functions for PASS, FAIL, and SKIP. What > is the difference between KSFT_FAIL and KSFT_XFAIL, and similarly > between KSFT_PASS and KSFT_XPASS? Either here or above the functions > should be a comment. I guess xfail and xpass are taken from pytest [1]. I took them from kselftest.h, in order to be somehow compatible with existing C API. But grepping code xpass is never used (not even in list of kselftest results [2]), xfail is used in about 4 tests (binderfs, ftrace, pidfd, seccomp). But I'm not a big fan of this pytest terminology "something is resulting the opposite than expected", IMHO simple pass and fail are enough. On the other hand I miss "test failed in preparation phase" (TBROK in LTP), skip has different meaning. Kind regards, Petr [1] https://docs.pytest.org/en/latest/skipping.html [2] https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-kselftest/msg06651.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-08 12:22 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-04-06 21:49 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Kselftest shell (or even C) API pvorel 2019-04-06 21:49 ` Petr Vorel 2019-04-06 21:49 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] selftests: Start shell API pvorel 2019-04-06 21:49 ` Petr Vorel 2019-04-08 11:06 ` zohar 2019-04-08 11:06 ` Mimi Zohar 2019-04-08 12:22 ` pvorel [this message] 2019-04-08 12:22 ` Petr Vorel 2019-04-08 11:38 ` chrubis 2019-04-08 11:38 ` Cyril Hrubis 2019-04-08 13:07 ` pvorel 2019-04-08 13:07 ` Petr Vorel 2019-04-06 21:49 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] selftest/kexec: Use kselftest " pvorel 2019-04-06 21:49 ` Petr Vorel 2019-04-08 11:29 ` zohar 2019-04-08 11:29 ` Mimi Zohar 2019-04-08 11:43 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] Kselftest shell (or even C) API chrubis 2019-04-08 11:43 ` Cyril Hrubis 2019-04-08 13:25 ` pvorel 2019-04-08 13:25 ` Petr Vorel 2019-04-08 12:14 ` zohar 2019-04-08 12:14 ` Mimi Zohar 2019-04-08 12:29 ` pvorel 2019-04-08 12:29 ` Petr Vorel
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=20190408122159.GA4381@dell5510 \ --to=unknown@example.com \ --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] selftests: Start shell API' \ /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
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.