> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Kroah-Hartman on Monday, June 12, 2017 3:57 PM
>
> 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)
IMHO something shorter like 'ksft_pass' would be better. However, that's
a variable name in struct ksft_count. Technically there would be no conflict
to have both a function and a structure variable with the same name, but it
would be confusing to maintain. I would recommend using the shorter
name for the functions, and renaming the internal variables, as shown
below.
I also think it's not critical to prefix every variable with ksft_ in this structure.
The variables are only ever accessed using the variable ksft_cnt, so the extra
prefix is not needed.
struct ksft_count {
unsigned int pass_count;
unsigned int fail_count;
unsigned int xfail_count;
unsigned int xpass_count;
unsigned int xskip_count;
};
Of course this rename has to flow through all references, like so:
> +{
> + ksft_cnt.ksft_pass++;
ksft_cnt.pass_count++;
> + 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);
> +}
Same thing here on function name length. Maybe 'kfst_fail'?
I think that for all these reporting functions, the first parameters
should be const char *desc. It should be the same whether the
test passes or fails. Then on a fail, there should be an optional
additional parameter indicating the reason for the failure.
It's important that the test description be invariant between runs.
This can be used as the human-readable identifier for each test.
You don't want this message to be a test description on success, but
a reason for failure on error. That's not consistent.
On success, no other string is required. On failure, it is nice (but optional)
to output the reasons for the failure. I would recommend doing this in a
YAML block, like so:
static inline void ksft_fail(const char *desc, const char *reason)
{
ksft_cnt.ksft_pass++;
printf("ok %d %s\n", ksft_test_num(), desc);
if (reason)
printf(" ---\n reason: \"%s\"\n ...\n", reason);
}
Note the leading space for each line of the YAML block, to indent it according
to the TAP13 protocol.
Then a call is either:
ksft_fail(desc, NULL);
or
ksft_fail(desc, "foo index failure")
> +
> +static inline void ksft_test_result_skip(const char *msg)
> +{
> + ksft_cnt.ksft_xskip++;
> + printf("ok %d # skip %s\n", ksft_test_num(), msg);
> }
You should add an optional 'reason' for ksft_skip as well.
> 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);
> }
>
> --
> 2.13.1
>
--
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
