On 06/13/2017 01:05 PM, Alice Ferrazzi wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:52 AM, Shuah Khan <shuah@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:shuah@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > On 06/13/2017 11:54 AM, Paul Elder wrote: > > On 06/12/2017 03:56 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > >> From: Paul Elder <paul.elder@xxxxxxxx <mailto: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 <mailto:paul.elder@xxxxxxxx>> > >> Signed-off-by: Alice Ferrazzi <alice.ferrazzi@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:alice.ferrazzi@xxxxxxxxx>> > >> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto: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? > > I added the increment functions for flexibility. If a test > chooses to increment individual pass/fail/xfai/xpass counts > and then print summary. > > > > > 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? > > xfail means that the test ix expected to fail but passed > xpass means that the test is expected pass, but failed. > > > With TAP 13 output there is no xfail or xpass format. > > Is probably like > ok 1 Correctly failed > > This mean that we can think to remove xfail and xpass ? Possibly - We can make that call later on whetherto remove or not. -- Shuah > > > > thanks, > -- Shuah > > > > 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); > >> } > >> > >> > > > > > > > thanks, > Alice > > -- > アリス フェッラッツィ > Alice Ferrazzi > > Gentoo Kernel Project Leader > Mail: Alice Ferrazzi <alice.ferrazzi@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:alice.ferrazzi@xxxxxxxxx>> > PGP: 2E4E 0856 461C 0585 1336 F496 5621 A6B2 8638 781A -- 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
