From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754057Ab2IYOKx (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:10:53 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60167 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753156Ab2IYOKw (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:10:52 -0400 Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:10:17 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Namhyung Kim Cc: Feng Tang , mingo@elte.hu, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, andi@firstfloor.org, David Ahern , Jiri Olsa , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: perf tools regression testing was Re: [PATCH v3 1/9] perf hists: Move hists_init() from util/evsel.c to util/hist.c Message-ID: <20120925141017.GD2892@infradead.org> References: <1348500251-9937-1-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com> <1348500251-9937-2-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com> <20120924160239.GD9977@infradead.org> <87pq5ayjuu.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> <20120925110519.GA28902@infradead.org> <1348577942.1877.32.camel@leonhard> <20120925133015.GA2892@infradead.org> <1348580868.1877.43.camel@leonhard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1348580868.1877.43.camel@leonhard> X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Em Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:47:48PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu: > 2012-09-25 (화), 10:30 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo: > > Em Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 09:59:02PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu: > > > Now I'm thinking of making it build-time test so that it can be executed > > > by make when specific argument is given - e.g. make C=1 ? > > I think there is room for a 'make -C tools/perf check' that would use > > the 'expect' tool to do not just this but also run record, report, etc > > and check its output against what is expected, perf test is ok for > > checking the APIs, but we need a test suite for the actual builtins as > > called from the command line. > Hmm.. we have 'make check' but running it ended up tons of macro > redefinition and unknown attribute warnings from sparse. :/ Ok, then 'make test', that would run 'perf test' + the expect like tests. I'm trying to figure out if http://www.noah.org/python/pexpect/ is a better choice, that way we don't have to learn yet another scripting language. - Arnaldo