kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Suraj Jitindar Singh <sjitindarsingh@gmail.com>
To: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,
	kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, lvivier@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com,
	drjones@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH V2 1/4] scripts/runtime: Add ability to mark test as don't run by default
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:13:13 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1470982393.4695.9.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160810132205.GA1574@potion>

On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 15:22 +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> 2016-08-10 11:59+1000, Suraj Jitindar Singh:
> > 
> > diff --git a/scripts/mkstandalone.sh b/scripts/mkstandalone.sh
> > @@ -74,6 +74,27 @@ generate_test ()
> >  
> >  	cat scripts/runtime.bash
> >  
> > +	if grep -qw "nodefault" <<<${args[1]}; then
> > +		echo -e "while true; do\n"\
> > +			"\tread -p \"Test marked as not to be run
> > by default,"\
> > +			"are you sure (Y/N)? \" response\n"\
> > +			"\tcase \$response in\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\"Y\" | \"y\" | \"Yes\" |
> > \"yes\")\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\tbreak\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\t;;\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\"N\" | \"n\" | \"No\" | \"no\")\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\t;&\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\"q\" | \"quit\" | \"exit\")\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\texit\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\t;;\n"\
> > +			"\t\t*)\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\techo Please select Y or N\n"\
> > +			"\t\t\t;;\n"\
> > +			"\tesac\n"\
> > +			"done"
> Uff, this is hard to read.
> 
> We do not care much about readability of the standalone script
> itself,
> but the source code should be.  It doesn't have to have be that fancy
> with user input either:
> 
>   echo 'read -p "$question? (y/N)' response
>   echo 'case $response in'
>   echo '	Y|y|Yes|yes) break;;'
>   echo '	*) exit;;
>   echo 'esac'
> 
> It's still ugly, what about adding a function to
> scripts/runtime.bash?
> More on that below.
> 
> > 
> > +		echo "standalone=\"true\""
> We already have $STANDALONE,
> 
>   echo "export STANDALONE=yes"
> 
> > 
> > diff --git a/scripts/runtime.bash b/scripts/runtime.bash
> > @@ -48,10 +48,16 @@ function run()
> >          return
> >      fi
> >  
> > -    if [ -n "$only_group" ] && ! grep -q "$only_group" <<<$groups;
> > then
> > +    if [ -n "$only_group" ] && ! grep -qw "$only_group"
> > <<<$groups; then
> >          return
> >      fi
> >  
> > +    if [ -z "$only_group" ] && grep -qw "nodefault" <<<$groups &&
> > +            ([ -z $standalone ] || [ $standalone != "true" ]);
> > then
> Continuing the idea about a function:  This can be replaced with
> 
>   if [ -z "$only_group" ] && grep -qw "nodefault" <<<$groups &&
> skip_nodefault;
> 
> with skip_nodefault defined earlier; It is not a horrible loss to
> load
> more code in the normal run,
> 
>   skip_nodefault () {
>   	[ "$STANDALONE" != yes ] && return true
> 
>   	# code ask the question and handle responses -- can be a
> fancier
>   	# now, that it actually is readable
>   }
> 
> That said, I am not a huge fan of user interaction in tests ...
> What is the targeted use-case?
The idea was basically to add the option to mark a test as not to
be run by default when invoking run_tests.sh. It was then suggested
on a previous version of this series that when invoked as a standalone
test the user be prompted to confirm that they actually want to
run the test.

Since there may be tests which can have a detrimental effect on the
host system or some other unintended side effect I thought it better to
require the user specifically invoke them.
> 
> The user has already specifically called this test, ./host_killer, so
> asking for confirmation is implying that the user is a monkey.
> 
> If the test was scripted, then we forced something like
> `yes | ./host_killer`.
I agree in hindsight that it doesn't make much sense to have the user
confirm that they want to run a test that they have specifically
invoked. That being said it's possible that someone running it may not
know that it has potentially negative effects on the host.

I think it might be better to have tests in the nodefault group require
explicit selection by the "-g" parameter when running through
run_tests.sh (current effect of series), while when a test is run
standalone just run it without any additional user input (different to
current operation) and assume the user knows what they are doing. Do
you agree with this?
> 
> > 
> > +        echo -e "`SKIP` $testname - (test marked as manual run
> > only)"
> Please remove the whitespaced dash " - " from output.
> 
Will Fix
> Thanks.
Thanks for the comments

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-12  6:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-10  1:59 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH V2 1/4] scripts/runtime: Add ability to mark test as don't run by default Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-10  1:59 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH V2 2/4] lib/powerpc: Add generic decrementer exception handler Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-10 10:38   ` Thomas Huth
2016-08-12  6:17     ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-10  1:59 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH V2 3/4] lib/powerpc: Add function to start secondary threads Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-10 11:25   ` Thomas Huth
2016-08-12  6:30     ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-12 11:19       ` Thomas Huth
2016-08-15  1:01         ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-12 17:07   ` Andrew Jones
2016-08-15  1:58     ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-15  6:27       ` Andrew Jones
2016-08-16  5:10         ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-10  1:59 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH V2 4/4] powerpc/tm: Add a test for H_CEDE while tm suspended Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-10  9:43   ` Thomas Huth
2016-08-12  6:36     ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-10 11:33   ` Thomas Huth
2016-08-12  6:36     ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-12 17:19   ` Andrew Jones
2016-08-15  2:01     ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-08-10 13:22 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH V2 1/4] scripts/runtime: Add ability to mark test as don't run by default Radim Krčmář
2016-08-12  6:13   ` Suraj Jitindar Singh [this message]
2016-08-12 10:00     ` Andrew Jones
2016-08-12 12:06       ` Radim Krčmář
2016-08-12 12:58         ` Andrew Jones
2016-08-14 23:41           ` Suraj Jitindar Singh

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=1470982393.4695.9.camel@gmail.com \
    --to=sjitindarsingh@gmail.com \
    --cc=drjones@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
    --cc=thuth@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).