On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:03 PM Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 09:25:03AM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > > Now that test_progs is shaping into more generic test framework, > > let's convert sockopt tests to it. This requires adding > > a helper to create and join a cgroup first (test__join_cgroup). > > Since we already hijack stdout/stderr that shouldn't be > > a problem (cgroup helpers log to stderr). > > > > The rest of the patches just move sockopt tests files under prog_tests/ > > and do the required small adjustments. > > Looks good. Thank you for working on it. > Could you de-verbose setsockopt test a bit? > #23/32 setsockopt: deny write ctx->retval:OK > #23/33 setsockopt: deny read ctx->retval:OK > #23/34 setsockopt: deny writing to ctx->optval:OK > #23/35 setsockopt: deny writing to ctx->optval_end:OK > #23/36 setsockopt: allow IP_TOS <= 128:OK > #23/37 setsockopt: deny IP_TOS > 128:OK > 37 subtests is a bit too much spam. If we merged test_btf into test_progs, we'd have >150 subtests, which would be pretty verbose as well. But the benefit of subtest is that you can run just that sub-test and debug/verify just it, without all the rest stuff. So I'm wondering, if too many lines of default output is the only problem, should we just not output per-subtest line by default? >
