From: Manu Bretelle <chantr4@gmail.com>
To: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, mykolal@fb.com,
ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev,
yhs@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: add --json-summary option to test_progs
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 17:24:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZBOzVGn7nPbVoNsi@worktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <88930a425a50f6c1f5a420bf2adbec3b285b96e4.camel@gmail.com>
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 01:33:56AM +0200, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-03-16 at 16:23 -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > In term of logical structure and maybe extensibility, this is more appropriate,
> > > > in term of pragmatism maybe less.
> > > >
> > > > I don't have strong opinions and can see benefit for both.
> > >
> > > idk, I don't have a strong opinion either.
> >
> > me neither, flatter struct would be simple to work with either with jq
> > or hacky grepping, so I guess the question would be how much do we
> > lose by using flatter structure?
>
> Okay, okay, noone wants to read jq manual, I get it :)
>
> I assume that current plan is to consume this output by some CI script
> (and e.g. provide a foldable list of failed tests/sub-tests in the
> final output).
Correct.
> So, we should probably use whatever makes more sense
> for those scripts. If you and Manu think that flat structure works
> best -- so be it.
Nested is the most logical representation of the data. Given the
one-liner you provided, let me play a bit more with it and see what it
would take to get minimal info out of it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-17 0:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-16 6:39 [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: add --json-summary option to test_progs Manu Bretelle
2023-03-16 15:03 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-03-16 16:38 ` Manu Bretelle
2023-03-16 19:18 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-03-16 23:23 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-03-16 23:33 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-03-17 0:07 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-03-17 0:24 ` Manu Bretelle [this message]
2023-03-16 23:21 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-03-17 0:40 ` Manu Bretelle
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=ZBOzVGn7nPbVoNsi@worktop \
--to=chantr4@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mykolal@fb.com \
--cc=yhs@fb.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox