On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:54 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:47:03AM -0500, Tamir Duberstein wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:40 AM Andy Shevchenko
> > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:13:36AM -0500, Tamir Duberstein wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > > - Use original test assertions as KUNIT_*_EQ_MSG produces hard-to-parse
> > > > messages. The new failure output is:
> > >
> > > It would be good if you put into cover letter, or even in the respectful patch
> > > the example of the error report for the old code and new code that it will be
> > > clear how it changes.
> > >
> > > > vsscanf("0 1e 3e43 31f0 0 0 5797 9c70", "%1hx %2hx %4hx %4hx %1hx %1hx %4hx %4hx", ...) expected 837828163 got 1044578334
> > > > not ok 1 " "
> > > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > > vsscanf("dc2:1c:0:3531:2621:5172:1:7", "%3hx:%2hx:%1hx:%4hx:%4hx:%4hx:%1hx:%1hx", ...) expected 892403712 got 28
> > > > not ok 2 ":"
> > > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > > vsscanf("e083,8f6e,b,70ca,1,1,aab1,10e4", "%4hx,%4hx,%1hx,%4hx,%1hx,%1hx,%4hx,%4hx", ...) expected 1892286475 got 757614
> > > > not ok 3 ","
> > > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > > vsscanf("2e72-8435-1-2fc-7cbd-c2f1-7158-2b41", "%4hx-%4hx-%1hx-%3hx-%4hx-%4hx-%4hx-%4hx", ...) expected 50069505 got 99381
> > > > not ok 4 "-"
> > > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > > vsscanf("403/0/17/1/11e7/1/1fe8/34ba", "%3hx/%1hx/%2hx/%1hx/%4hx/%1hx/%4hx/%4hx", ...) expected 65559 got 1507328
> > > > not ok 5 "/"
> > > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: pass:0 fail:5 skip:0 total:5
> > > > not ok 4 numbers_list_field_width_val_width
> > > > # numbers_slice: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > > vsscanf("3c87eac0f4afa1f9231da52", "%1hx%4hx%4hx%4hx%1hx%4hx%4hx%1hx", ...) expected 1257942031 got 2886715518
> >
> > Makes sense. As you can see the error report for the new code is
> > included here. I'll add the old code's error report if I have to
> > respin v8.
>
> At a bare minimum. can you add in the reply to this email?
Oh, sure:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 6:54 AM Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> [ 383.100048] test_scanf: vsscanf("1574 9 64ca 935b 7 142d ff58 0", "%4hx %1hx %4hx %4hx %1hx %4hx %4hx %1hx", ...) expected 2472240330 got 1690959881
> [ 383.102843] test_scanf: vsscanf("f12:2:d:2:c166:1:36b:1906", "%3hx:%1hx:%1hx:%1hx:%4hx:%1hx:%3hx:%4hx", ...) expected 131085 got 851970
> [ 383.105376] test_scanf: vsscanf("4,b2fe,3,593,6,0,3bde,0", "%1hx,%4hx,%1hx,%3hx,%1hx,%1hx,%4hx,%1hx", ...) expected 93519875 got 242430
> [ 383.105659] test_scanf: vsscanf("6-1-2-1-d9e6-f-93e-e567", "%1hx-%1hx-%1hx-%1hx-%4hx-%1hx-%3hx-%4hx", ...) expected 65538 got 131073
> [ 383.106127] test_scanf: vsscanf("72d6/35/e88d/1/0/6c8c/7/1", "%4hx/%2hx/%4hx/%1hx/%1hx/%4hx/%1hx/%1hx", ...) expected 125069 got 3901554741
> [ 383.106235] test_scanf: vsscanf("c9bea1b8122113e9a168df573", "%4hx%4hx%1hx%4hx%4hx%1hx%4hx%3hx", ...) expected 571539457 got 106936
> [ 383.106398] test_scanf: failed 6 out of 2545 tests
This is from https://lore.kernel.org/all/Z6s6WsIw3VCGys6K@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
(doesn't load for me, seems lore is having problems).
