Re: [PATCH v7 0/3] scanf: convert self-test to KUnit

Andy Shevchenko
2025-02-11T15:54:36Z

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:47:03AM -0500, Tamir Duberstein wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:40 AM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:13:36AM -0500, Tamir Duberstein wrote:

...

> > > - Use original test assertions as KUNIT_*_EQ_MSG produces hard-to-parse
> > > messages. The new failure output is:
> >
> > It would be good if you put into cover letter, or even in the respectful patch
> > the example of the error report for the old code and new code that it will be
> > clear how it changes.
> >
> > > vsscanf("0 1e 3e43 31f0 0 0 5797 9c70", "%1hx %2hx %4hx %4hx %1hx %1hx %4hx %4hx", ...) expected 837828163 got 1044578334
> > > not ok 1 " "
> > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > vsscanf("dc2:1c:0:3531:2621:5172:1:7", "%3hx:%2hx:%1hx:%4hx:%4hx:%4hx:%1hx:%1hx", ...) expected 892403712 got 28
> > > not ok 2 ":"
> > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > vsscanf("e083,8f6e,b,70ca,1,1,aab1,10e4", "%4hx,%4hx,%1hx,%4hx,%1hx,%1hx,%4hx,%4hx", ...) expected 1892286475 got 757614
> > > not ok 3 ","
> > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > vsscanf("2e72-8435-1-2fc-7cbd-c2f1-7158-2b41", "%4hx-%4hx-%1hx-%3hx-%4hx-%4hx-%4hx-%4hx", ...) expected 50069505 got 99381
> > > not ok 4 "-"
> > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > vsscanf("403/0/17/1/11e7/1/1fe8/34ba", "%3hx/%1hx/%2hx/%1hx/%4hx/%1hx/%4hx/%4hx", ...) expected 65559 got 1507328
> > > not ok 5 "/"
> > > # numbers_list_field_width_val_width: pass:0 fail:5 skip:0 total:5
> > > not ok 4 numbers_list_field_width_val_width
> > > # numbers_slice: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/scanf_kunit.c:92
> > > vsscanf("3c87eac0f4afa1f9231da52", "%1hx%4hx%4hx%4hx%1hx%4hx%4hx%1hx", ...) expected 1257942031 got 2886715518
>
> Makes sense. As you can see the error report for the new code is
> included here. I'll add the old code's error report if I have to
> respin v8.

At a bare minimum. can you add in the reply to this email?

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko