On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 10:36:37AM +0200, Lukáš Czerner wrote: > On Mon, 1 Jul 2013, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > check | 371 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- > > > common/config | 126 ++++++++++++-------- > > > common/rc | 63 +++++----- > > > 3 files changed, 326 insertions(+), 234 deletions(-) > > > > This patch probably needs to be broken up, too. A substantial part > > of it is indentation changes, which probably should be split into 2 > > parts - factor code into function, then wrap loop around function. > > The change to the summary information should be done as a separate > > patch, too. I suspect many of the common/config changes coul dbe > > split up, too. > > Ok, I'll see how can I split it up. Btw, indentation in xfstests is > a mess, because sometimes we're using spaces and sometimes tabs. Is > there any preference ? (I would definitely prefer tabs) Tabs. > > The changing of the $RESULT_BASE should probably also > > bein a separate patch, because this is something that we'll need to > > discuss as it changes the structure of the output.... > > I am not sure it should be separate from this patch because the new > structure will only be used if the new config format (with sections) > is used. Which is a bit confusing, especially as a separate result directory might be desired for the output of each section - say I want to keep all the "config A" results together, but spearate to all the "config B" results. Placing them all under the same $RESULT_BASE isn't ideal at that point.... IOWs, I suspect that $RESULT_BASE should be able to be defined in the section config so that you can redirect results that way. > > Oh, and why make a distinction between no sections and > > $OPTIONS_HAVE_SECTIONS in the config file? Surely no sections is > > just the same as having 1 section.... > > Yes, but it's much "nicer" to check boolean option than checking > what is the name of the first section. Really this is just a > workaround, because I did not want to change result structure and > output if one is not using the new config format. That's another reason why I think that we should be able to have a per-section RESULTS_BASE - that way the code doesn't care how RESULTS_BASE is defined or where it points to - the output of xfstests is *always* the same. That is, after all, why $RESULTS_BASE was introduced in the first place. > It could be done > so that when there are no sections we'll always use "default" section, > not sure what would people prefer. Exactly why it needs discussion ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
