On 06/12/2017 03:56 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> From: Paul Elder <paul.elder@xxxxxxxx>
>
> Add TAP13 conformat output functions to kselftest.h.
>
> Also add exit functions that output TAP13 exiting text, as well as
> functions to keep track of testing progress.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Elder <paul.elder@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Alice Ferrazzi <alice.ferrazzi@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v2: Just use the standard function names, no _tap suffix - Alice
>
> tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h b/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h
> index ef1c80d67ac7..1d874a50d957 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h
> @@ -31,38 +31,82 @@ struct ksft_count {
>
> static struct ksft_count ksft_cnt;
>
> +static inline int ksft_test_num(void)
> +{
> + return ksft_cnt.ksft_pass + ksft_cnt.ksft_fail +
> + ksft_cnt.ksft_xfail + ksft_cnt.ksft_xpass +
> + ksft_cnt.ksft_xskip;
> +}
> +
> static inline void ksft_inc_pass_cnt(void) { ksft_cnt.ksft_pass++; }
> static inline void ksft_inc_fail_cnt(void) { ksft_cnt.ksft_fail++; }
> static inline void ksft_inc_xfail_cnt(void) { ksft_cnt.ksft_xfail++; }
> static inline void ksft_inc_xpass_cnt(void) { ksft_cnt.ksft_xpass++; }
> static inline void ksft_inc_xskip_cnt(void) { ksft_cnt.ksft_xskip++; }
>
> +static inline void ksft_print_header(void)
> +{
> + printf("TAP version 13\n");
> +}
> +
> static inline void ksft_print_cnts(void)
> {
> - printf("Pass: %d Fail: %d Xfail: %d Xpass: %d, Xskip: %d\n",
> - ksft_cnt.ksft_pass, ksft_cnt.ksft_fail,
> - ksft_cnt.ksft_xfail, ksft_cnt.ksft_xpass,
> - ksft_cnt.ksft_xskip);
> + printf("1..%d\n", ksft_test_num());
> +}
> +
> +static inline void ksft_test_result_pass(const char *msg)
> +{
> + ksft_cnt.ksft_pass++;
> + printf("ok %d %s\n", ksft_test_num(), msg);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void ksft_test_result_fail(const char *msg)
> +{
> + ksft_cnt.ksft_fail++;
> + printf("not ok %d %s\n", ksft_test_num(), msg);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void ksft_test_result_skip(const char *msg)
> +{
> + ksft_cnt.ksft_xskip++;
> + printf("ok %d # skip %s\n", ksft_test_num(), msg);
> }
I just realized; the test count increments within the these three functions
(the ksft_test_result_* functions) should use the actual incrementor function
calls (ksft_inc_*_cnt) instead of directly incrementing them, shouldn't they?
Although I suppose it's readable enough that it's fine?
As far as I can tell as long as we have these ksft_test_result_* functions
that increment the test count *and* output the test result, the incrementor
functions aren't going to be used a lot, if ever.
Thoughts?
Also what's the difference between fail/xfail and pass/xpass?
Thank you,
Paul
> static inline int ksft_exit_pass(void)
> {
> + ksft_print_cnts();
> exit(KSFT_PASS);
> }
> +
> static inline int ksft_exit_fail(void)
> {
> + printf("Bail out!\n");
> + ksft_print_cnts();
> exit(KSFT_FAIL);
> }
> +
> +static inline int ksft_exit_fail_msg(const char *msg)
> +{
> + printf("Bail out! %s\n", msg);
> + ksft_print_cnts();
> + exit(KSFT_FAIL);
> +}
> +
> static inline int ksft_exit_xfail(void)
> {
> + ksft_print_cnts();
> exit(KSFT_XFAIL);
> }
> +
> static inline int ksft_exit_xpass(void)
> {
> + ksft_print_cnts();
> exit(KSFT_XPASS);
> }
> +
> static inline int ksft_exit_skip(void)
> {
> + ksft_print_cnts();
> exit(KSFT_SKIP);
> }
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
