On Sat, 1 Mar 2025 11:52:06 +0100 Matthieu Baerts wrote: > On 28/02/2025 19:00, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > The Python lib based tests report that they are producing > > "KTAP version 1", but really we aren't making use of any > > KTAP features, like subtests. Our output is plain TAP. > > > > Report TAP 13 instead of KTAP 1, this is what mptcp tests do, > > Indeed, and also TC tests, and all the ones using kselftest_harness.h I > think. > > > and what NIPA knows how to parse best. For HW testing we need > > precise subtest result tracking. > > I guess the best would be to have the kselftests infrastructure fully > supporting KTAP, and then have a way for each test to print subtests > correctly, not nested in the comments like it is done for the moment. > But that looks harder to put in place, and the current solution is used > in a few areas. Right. So for additional context for folks less familiar with selftests the two minor inconveniences which made "supporting KTAP" a less exciting option are: (a) we run make run_tests which wraps things in an outer TAP, so we'd end up with a hybrid, anyway; (b) NIPA only supports one level of subtests. Thanks for the review!
