On 04/05/2024 14.28, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
There are times we would like to test a function that is known to fail
in some conditions due to a bug in implementation (QEMU, KVM, or even
hardware). It would be nice to count these as known failures and not
report a summary failure.
xfail is not the same thing, xfail means failure is required and a pass
causes the test to fail. So add kfail for known failures.
Actually, I wonder whether that's not rather a bug in report_xfail()
instead. Currently, when you call report_xfail(true, ...), the result is
*always* counted as a failure, either as an expected failure (if the test
really failed), or as a normal failure (if the test succeeded). What's the
point of counting a successful test as a failure??
Andrew, you've originally introduced report_xfail in commit a5af7b8a67e,
could you please comment on this?
IMHO we should rather do something like this instead:
diff --git a/lib/report.c b/lib/report.c
--- a/lib/report.c
+++ b/lib/report.c
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ static void va_report(const char *msg_fmt,
skipped++;
else if (xfail && !pass)
xfailures++;
- else if (xfail || !pass)
+ else if (!xfail && !pass)
failures++;
spin_unlock(&lock);
Thomas
