On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 1:17 AM Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 19:48, Rae Moar <rmoar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Change KUnit test output to better comply with KTAP v1 specifications > > found here: https://kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/ktap.html. > > 1) Use "KTAP version 1" instead of "TAP version 14" as test output header > > 2) Remove '-' between test number and test name on test result lines > > 2) Add KTAP version lines to each subtest header as well > > > > Note that the new KUnit output still includes the “# Subtest” line now > > located after the KTAP version line. This does not completely match the > > KTAP v1 spec but since it is classified as a diagnostic line, it is not > > expected to be disruptive or break any existing parsers. This > > “# Subtest” line comes from the TAP 14 spec > > (https://testanything.org/tap-version-14-specification.html) > > and it is used to define the test name before the results. > > > > Original output: > > > > TAP version 14 > > 1..1 > > # Subtest: kunit-test-suite > > 1..3 > > ok 1 - kunit_test_1 > > ok 2 - kunit_test_2 > > ok 3 - kunit_test_3 > > # kunit-test-suite: pass:3 fail:0 skip:0 total:3 > > # Totals: pass:3 fail:0 skip:0 total:3 > > ok 1 - kunit-test-suite > > > > New output: > > > > KTAP version 1 > > 1..1 > > KTAP version 1 > > # Subtest: kunit-test-suite > > 1..3 > > ok 1 kunit_test_1 > > ok 2 kunit_test_2 > > ok 3 kunit_test_3 > > # kunit-test-suite: pass:3 fail:0 skip:0 total:3 > > # Totals: pass:3 fail:0 skip:0 total:3 > > ok 1 kunit-test-suite > > > > Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx> > > I tried this patch, see the full boot log [1] and I can still see some > tests that output the "old" format with 'ok 1 - kunit_test_1', for example > > ok 1 - 1901-12-13 Lower bound of 32bit < 0 timestamp, no extra bits > > Isn't this something that should be converted too? Yes, thanks for catching that. That's what I get from only looking over the diff this time since I thought I remembered the code... We also want this diff to fix a) debugfs, b) subtests. diff --git a/lib/kunit/debugfs.c b/lib/kunit/debugfs.c index 1048ef1b8d6e..de0ee2e03ed6 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/debugfs.c +++ b/lib/kunit/debugfs.c @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ static int debugfs_print_results(struct seq_file *seq, void *v) kunit_suite_for_each_test_case(suite, test_case) debugfs_print_result(seq, suite, test_case); - seq_printf(seq, "%s %d - %s\n", + seq_printf(seq, "%s %d %s\n", kunit_status_to_ok_not_ok(success), 1, suite->name); return 0; } diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c index 19344cb501c5..c9d57a1d9524 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c @@ -556,7 +556,7 @@ int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite) kunit_log(KERN_INFO, &test, KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT - "%s %d - %s", + "%s %d %s", kunit_status_to_ok_not_ok(test.status), test.param_index + 1, param_desc); Daniel
