From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, ast@kernel.org, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: remove global fail/success counts
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 14:17:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5248b967-2887-2205-3e59-fc067e2ada33@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190819191752.241637-3-sdf@google.com>
On 8/19/19 9:17 PM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> Now that we have a global per-test/per-environment state, there
> is no longer need to have global fail/success counters (and there
> is no need to save/get the diff before/after the test).
Thanks for the improvements, just a small comment below, otherwise LGTM.
> Introduce QCHECK macro (suggested by Andrii) and covert existing tests
> to it. QCHECK uses new test__fail() to record the failure.
>
> Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
[...]
> @@ -96,17 +93,25 @@ extern struct ipv6_packet pkt_v6;
> #define _CHECK(condition, tag, duration, format...) ({ \
> int __ret = !!(condition); \
> if (__ret) { \
> - error_cnt++; \
> + test__fail(); \
> printf("%s:FAIL:%s ", __func__, tag); \
> printf(format); \
> } else { \
> - pass_cnt++; \
> printf("%s:PASS:%s %d nsec\n", \
> __func__, tag, duration); \
> } \
> __ret; \
> })
>
> +#define QCHECK(condition) ({ \
> + int __ret = !!(condition); \
> + if (__ret) { \
> + test__fail(); \
> + printf("%s:FAIL:%d ", __func__, __LINE__); \
> + } \
> + __ret; \
> +})
I know it's just a tiny nit but the name QCHECK() really doesn't tell me anything
if I don't see its definition. Even just a CHECK_FAIL() might be 'better' and
more aligned with the CHECK() and CHECK_ATTR() we have, at least I don't think
many would automatically derive 'quiet' from the Q prefix [0].
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzbUGiUZBWkTWe2=LfhkXYhQGndN9gR6VTZwfV3eytstUw@mail.gmail.com/
> #define CHECK(condition, tag, format...) \
> _CHECK(condition, tag, duration, format)
> #define CHECK_ATTR(condition, tag, format...) \
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-21 12:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-19 19:17 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: misc fixes Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-19 19:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: test__skip Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-19 19:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: remove global fail/success counts Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-21 12:17 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2019-08-21 17:11 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-19 19:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: remove asserts from subtests Stanislav Fomichev
2019-08-19 19:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/4] selftests/bpf: test_progs: remove unused ret Stanislav Fomichev
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=5248b967-2887-2205-3e59-fc067e2ada33@iogearbox.net \
--to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=andriin@fb.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--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).