From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luc Van Oostenryck Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] testsuite: report as error tests known to fail but which succeed Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 13:52:51 +0100 Message-ID: <20161118125251.GA17412@macpro.local> References: <20161102214509.36571-1-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> <20161102214509.36571-4-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-qk0-f196.google.com ([209.85.220.196]:36000 "EHLO mail-qk0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932221AbcKRMw4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Nov 2016 07:52:56 -0500 Received: by mail-qk0-f196.google.com with SMTP id h201so31801448qke.3 for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 04:52:55 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Christopher Li Cc: Linux-Sparse On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:13:58AM +0800, Christopher Li wrote: > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 5:45 AM, Luc Van Oostenryck > wrote: > > Such situation may simply show that what was tested is now fixed > > and that it's juste the test annotation which need to be adapted, > > but can be a sign that something else is broken. > > > > Reporting the exact result (failure/success, known-to-fail/expect-to-succeed) > > make the testsuite more useful and allow to use more efficiently > > git-bisect or other automated testing tools. > > I like what you are doing as a result. > > But I think the implementation has room to improve. > I don't like deep and messy "else" statement. > > I attach a patch which I modify base on yours. I hope it is > easier to read. Care to review it? Yes, I much prefer like this. Thanks. But there is something I would like to check but I can't do that now. I'll come back on it later. Luc