All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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.