Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] ftracetest: Initial commit for ftracetest

[Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>]

(2014/08/28 0:54), Luis Henriques wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Not really a complete review, but just 2 comments on this script:
> 
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:15:18AM +0000, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> ...
>> +prlog() { # messages
>> +  echo $@ | tee -a $LOG_FILE
>> +}
>> +catlog() { #file
>> +  cat $1 | tee -a $LOG_FILE
>> +}
>> +
>> +# Testcase management
>> +PASSED_CASES=
>> +FAILED_CASES=
>> +CASENO=0
>> +testcase() { # testfile
>> +  CASENO=$((CASENO+1))
>> +  prlog -n "[$CASENO]"`grep "^#[ \t]*description:" $1 | cut -f2 -d:`
>> +}
>> +failed() {
>> +  prlog -e "\t[FAIL]"
>> +  FAILED_CASES="$FAILED_CASES $CASENO"
>> +}
>> +passed() {
>> +  prlog -e "\t[PASS]"
>> +  PASSED_CASES="$PASSED_CASES $CASENO"
>> +}
> 
> What I see here is a '-e' being echo'ed and not really a '-e' switch
> being used to 'echo'.  (Also, I'm not sure if this is a standard
> switch...).
> 
> This applies to all the other 'prlog -e'.

Oh, really? what shell did you use?
My target shell is the busybox and I've tested it on fedora20.

e.g. busybox echo command seems accept -e.
  $ busybox echo -e '\tfoo'
  	foo

Of course maybe I'd better not use \t, but "	"...


>> +
>> +
>> +# Run one test case
>> +run_test() { # testfile
>> +  local testname=`basename $1`
>> +  local testlog=`mktemp --tmpdir=$LOG_DIR ${testname}-XXXXXX.log`
>> +  testcase $1
>> +  echo "execute: "$1 > $testlog
>> +  (cd $TRACING_DIR; set -x ; source $t) >> $testlog 2>&1
>> +  ret=$?
> 
> I believe the usage of 'source' is a bashism, and '.' should be used
> instead.  In my environment, 'source' results in ret=127.  Replacing
> it by '.' fixes it.

Ah, right. I missed that, I'll fix that :)

Thank you,


-- 
Masami HIRAMATSU
Software Platform Research Dept. Linux Technology Research Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com