From: Tom Zanussi <zanussi@kernel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mhiramat@kernel.org, namhyung@kernel.org,
vedang.patel@intel.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
joel@joelfernandes.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
julia@ni.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 15/15] tracing: Add hist trigger action 'expected fail' test case
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 12:45:15 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1550688315.2027.20.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190220133316.587f3941@gandalf.local.home>
On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 13:33 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 12:10:31 -0600
> Tom Zanussi <zanussi@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > As far as I understand it (there's no other case of an xfail test
> > in
> > the testsuite, so nothing similar to compare it to), the test
> > output is
> > correct - here we get the expected fail, XFAIL, and not a FAIL as
> > any
> > test, xfail or normal, that failed would produce:
>
> Yeah, I've been staring at the code, and commit:
>
> 915de2adb584a ftracetest: Add POSIX.3 standard and XFAIL result codes
>
>
> >
> > tools/testing/selftests/ftrace# ./ftracetest test.d/trigger/
> > === Ftrace unit tests ===
> > [1] event trigger - test inter-event histogram trigger expected
> > fail actions
> > [XFAIL]
> > [2] event trigger - test extended error support
> > [PASS]
> >
> > And here the summary shows none failed, while we did have one
> > expected
> > xfail, but that's what was expected, and not a failure:
> >
> > # of passed: 31
> > # of failed: 0
> > # of unresolved: 0
> > # of untested: 0
> > # of unsupported: 0
> > # of xfailed: 1
>
> Yeah, but it's marked as RED, which is why I thought it was a
> failure.
>
> > # of undefined(test bug): 0
> >
> > If that's not correct, I'll fix it but at this point I'm not sure
> > what
> > the output should be if not that.
>
> OK, so this has nothing to do with your patch set. I've tested
> everything else, and I'm ready to finally push my tree to linux-next.
>
> I'm thinking that we should get rid of xfail, as it's really
> confusing,
> and I don't understand its purpose. But that shouldn't stop pushing
> your patches.
>
OK, I'm fine with removing it, if it's too confusing. IIRC Masami
suggested it to highlight that not all actions and handlers can be used
together, so I guess I'll hold off on a patch removing it until he can
chime in...
Thanks,
Tom
> Thanks,
>
> -- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-20 18:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-13 23:42 [PATCH v15 00/15] tracing: Hist trigger snapshot and onchange additions Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 01/15] tracing: Refactor hist trigger action code Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 02/15] tracing: Make hist trigger Documentation better reflect actions/handlers Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 03/15] tracing: Split up onmatch action data Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 04/15] tracing: Generalize hist trigger onmax and save action Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 05/15] tracing: Add conditional snapshot Tom Zanussi
2019-02-14 23:11 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-02-14 23:25 ` Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 06/15] tracing: Add hist trigger snapshot() action Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 07/15] tracing: Add hist trigger snapshot() action Documentation Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 08/15] tracing: Add hist trigger onchange() handler Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 09/15] tracing: Add hist trigger onchange() handler Documentation Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 10/15] tracing: Add alternative synthetic event trace action syntax Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 11/15] tracing: Add SPDX license GPL-2.0 license identifier to inter-event testcases Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 12/15] tracing: Add hist trigger snapshot() action test case Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 13/15] tracing: Add hist trigger onchange() handler " Tom Zanussi
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 14/15] tracing: Add alternative synthetic event trace action " Tom Zanussi
2019-02-15 15:06 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2019-02-13 23:42 ` [PATCH v15 15/15] tracing: Add hist trigger action 'expected fail' " Tom Zanussi
2019-02-15 15:08 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2019-02-15 15:36 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-02-20 17:17 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-02-20 17:38 ` Tom Zanussi
2019-02-20 17:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-02-20 18:10 ` Tom Zanussi
2019-02-20 18:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-02-20 18:45 ` Tom Zanussi [this message]
2019-02-20 18:54 ` Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1550688315.2027.20.camel@kernel.org \
--to=zanussi@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=julia@ni.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vedang.patel@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.