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 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).