From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Cc: Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: remove asserts from subtests
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 12:52:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzbUGiUZBWkTWe2=LfhkXYhQGndN9gR6VTZwfV3eytstUw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190814164742.208909-5-sdf@google.com>
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 9:48 AM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> wrote:
>
> Otherwise they can bring the whole process down.
>
> Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
> ---
This is probably why you added all that extra logging in __test__fail(), right?
So had a low-priority TODO item to add another CHECK()-like macro that
would only report failure (but won't bump/log success). Seems like
this is something that would be useful for these asserts?
What do you think about either QCHECK() (for "quiet" check) or surely
we can also do ASSERT (but it's less obvious that it won't log success
and it's also not obvious that it won't actually terminate test
immediately).
Then inside that QCHECK() you can log file:line number, similar to
CHECK(), but only for failure case.
Thoughts?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-14 19:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-14 16:47 [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: misc fixes Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-14 16:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: change formatting of the condenced output Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-14 17:00 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-14 17:07 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-14 16:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: test__skip Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-14 19:22 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-08-14 19:30 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-08-14 19:53 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-14 20:01 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-08-16 5:16 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-16 5:23 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-08-14 16:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: remove global fail/success counts Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-14 19:47 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-08-14 20:07 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-14 20:22 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-08-14 16:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: remove asserts from subtests Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-14 19:52 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
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='CAEf4BzbUGiUZBWkTWe2=LfhkXYhQGndN9gR6VTZwfV3eytstUw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=andriin@fb.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).