public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>
To: Andrew Jones <andrew.jones@linux.dev>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com,
	lvivier@redhat.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com,
	imbrenda@linux.ibm.com, nrb@linux.ibm.com, npiggin@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC kvm-unit-tests PATCH] lib/report: Return pass/fail result from report
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 16:45:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zxu9MkAob0zVCsYQ@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241023165347.174745-2-andrew.jones@linux.dev>

Hi Drew,

On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 06:53:48PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> A nice pattern to use in order to try and maintain parsable reports,
> but also output unexpected values, is
> 
>     if (!report(value == expected_value, "my test")) {
>         report_info("failure due to unexpected value (received %d, expected %d)",
>                     value, expected_value);
>     }

This looks like a good idea to me, makes the usage of report() similar to
the kernel pattern of wrapping an if condition around WARN_ON():

	if (WARN_ON(condition)) {
		do_stuff()
	}

Plus, current users are not affected by the change so I see no reason not
to have the choice.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <andrew.jones@linux.dev>
> ---
>  lib/libcflat.h |  6 +++---
>  lib/report.c   | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/libcflat.h b/lib/libcflat.h
> index eec34c3f2710..b4110b9ec91b 100644
> --- a/lib/libcflat.h
> +++ b/lib/libcflat.h
> @@ -97,11 +97,11 @@ void report_prefix_pushf(const char *prefix_fmt, ...)
>  extern void report_prefix_push(const char *prefix);
>  extern void report_prefix_pop(void);
>  extern void report_prefix_popn(int n);
> -extern void report(bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
> +extern bool report(bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
>  		__attribute__((format(printf, 2, 3), nonnull(2)));
> -extern void report_xfail(bool xfail, bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
> +extern bool report_xfail(bool xfail, bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
>  		__attribute__((format(printf, 3, 4), nonnull(3)));
> -extern void report_kfail(bool kfail, bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
> +extern bool report_kfail(bool kfail, bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
>  		__attribute__((format(printf, 3, 4), nonnull(3)));
>  extern void report_abort(const char *msg_fmt, ...)
>  					__attribute__((format(printf, 1, 2)))
> diff --git a/lib/report.c b/lib/report.c
> index 0756e64e6f10..43c0102c1b0e 100644
> --- a/lib/report.c
> +++ b/lib/report.c
> @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ void report_prefix_popn(int n)
>  	spin_unlock(&lock);
>  }
>  
> -static void va_report(const char *msg_fmt,
> +static bool va_report(const char *msg_fmt,
>  		bool pass, bool xfail, bool kfail, bool skip, va_list va)
>  {
>  	const char *prefix = skip ? "SKIP"
> @@ -114,14 +114,20 @@ static void va_report(const char *msg_fmt,
>  		failures++;
>  
>  	spin_unlock(&lock);
> +
> +	return pass || xfail;

va_report() has 4 boolean parameters that the callers set. 'kfail' can be
ignored, because all it does is control which variable serves as the
accumulator for the failure.

I was thinking about the 'skip' parameter - report_skip() sets pass = xfail
= false, skip = true. Does it matter that va_report() returns false for
report_skip()? I don't think so (report_skip() returns void), just wanting
to make sure we've considered all the cases.  Sorry if this looks like
nitpicking.

Other than that, the patch looks good to me.

Thanks,
Alex

>  }
>  
> -void report(bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
> +bool report(bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
>  {
>  	va_list va;
> +	bool ret;
> +
>  	va_start(va, msg_fmt);
> -	va_report(msg_fmt, pass, false, false, false, va);
> +	ret = va_report(msg_fmt, pass, false, false, false, va);
>  	va_end(va);
> +
> +	return ret;
>  }
>  
>  void report_pass(const char *msg_fmt, ...)
> @@ -142,24 +148,32 @@ void report_fail(const char *msg_fmt, ...)
>  	va_end(va);
>  }
>  
> -void report_xfail(bool xfail, bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
> +bool report_xfail(bool xfail, bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
>  {
> +	bool ret;
> +
>  	va_list va;
>  	va_start(va, msg_fmt);
> -	va_report(msg_fmt, pass, xfail, false, false, va);
> +	ret = va_report(msg_fmt, pass, xfail, false, false, va);
>  	va_end(va);
> +
> +	return ret;
>  }
>  
>  /*
>   * kfail is known failure. If kfail is true then test will succeed
>   * regardless of pass.
>   */
> -void report_kfail(bool kfail, bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
> +bool report_kfail(bool kfail, bool pass, const char *msg_fmt, ...)
>  {
> +	bool ret;
> +
>  	va_list va;
>  	va_start(va, msg_fmt);
> -	va_report(msg_fmt, pass, false, kfail, false, va);
> +	ret = va_report(msg_fmt, pass, false, kfail, false, va);
>  	va_end(va);
> +
> +	return ret;
>  }
>  
>  void report_skip(const char *msg_fmt, ...)
> -- 
> 2.47.0
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2024-10-25 15:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-10-23 16:53 [RFC kvm-unit-tests PATCH] lib/report: Return pass/fail result from report Andrew Jones
2024-10-25 15:45 ` Alexandru Elisei [this message]
2024-10-29 10:59   ` Andrew Jones
2024-10-29 16:58 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2024-11-06  8:13 ` Andrew Jones

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=Zxu9MkAob0zVCsYQ@arm.com \
    --to=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
    --cc=andrew.jones@linux.dev \
    --cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@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