From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Stancek Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 12:52:00 -0500 (EST) Subject: [LTP] [PATCH 2/2] lib/tst_test.c: Restrict that tst_brk() only works with TBROK/TCONF In-Reply-To: <5BE542AD.4060207@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <1541681733-18845-1-git-send-email-yangx.jy@cn.fujitsu.com> <1541681733-18845-2-git-send-email-yangx.jy@cn.fujitsu.com> <60497535.71361444.1541699583188.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <5BE4F51E.3060900@cn.fujitsu.com> <1919219905.71573908.1541750091092.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <5BE542AD.4060207@cn.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: <1931132489.71956282.1541785920854.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it ----- Original Message ----- > On 2018/11/09 15:54, Jan Stancek wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> On 2018/11/09 1:53, Jan Stancek wrote: > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>> 1) Add tst_check_ttype() to check if TPASS/TFAIL/TWARN/TINFO is > >>>> passed into tst_brk() and convert it to TBROK forcely. > >>>> 2) Only update test result in library process and main test process > >>>> because the exit status of child can be passed into main test > >>>> process by check_child_status(). > >>>> 3) Increase the number of skipped when calling tst_brk(TCONF). > >>>> 4) Increase the number of warnings when calling tst_brk(TBROK) in > >>>> test cleanup(), other than that print "Test broken!" when calling > >>>> tst_brk(TBROK). > >>>> > >>>> Fix: #408 > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Xiao Yang > >>>> --- > >>>> lib/tst_test.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > >>>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/lib/tst_test.c b/lib/tst_test.c > >>>> index 661fbbf..c8d8eff 100644 > >>>> --- a/lib/tst_test.c > >>>> +++ b/lib/tst_test.c > >>>> @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ struct results { > >>>> int skipped; > >>>> int failed; > >>>> int warnings; > >>>> + int broken; > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I don't follow what benefit this provides. It generates message "Test > >>> broken", > >>> but we already know that test is broken by message in tst_vbrk_() / > >>> tst_cvres(). > >> Hi Jan, > >> > >> We can remove the unnecessary message "Test broken", and also apply the > >> check > >> for > >> ttype in tst_brk() written by your patch. > > Or maybe add "Broken: " to summary? > > > >> According to the issue #$08, we want to increase result counters when > >> calling > >> tst_brk(). > >> e.g. > >> 1) Increase the skipped counter when calling tst_brk(TCONF). > >> 2) Increase the warnings counter when calling tst_brk(TBROK/FAIL) in > >> test cleanup(), other than that increase the failed counter when > >> calling tst_brk(TBROK/FAIL). > > I'd keep counters reflecting the messages. I imagine if summary says > > "warnings: 1", people would be searching for 'WARN' in output. > > > > TCONF - print CONF message, increase skipped > > TFAIL - print FAIL message, increase failed > > TBROK - print BROK message, increase broken > > > > What do you think? > Hi Jan, > > Usually, calling tst_brk() can do above behaviors as you said. > > How about doing the following behaviors when calling tst_brk() in test > cleanup? > ----------------------------------------------- > TCONF - print CONF message, increase skipped > TFAIL - print FAIL message, increase warnings > TBROK - print BROK message, increase warnings > ----------------------------------------------- I don't think this matches your v2 patch. In your v2, we would convert FAIL and BROK during test cleanup to WARN. This happens before message is printed. So I think your v2 is proposing: TCONF - print CONF message, increase skipped TFAIL - print WARN message, increase warnings TBROK - print WARN message, increase warnings I find v2 style more clear, because message in log matches summary at the end. Regards, Jan > > Best Reagrds, > Xiao Yang > > > Regards, > > Jan > > > > > > > > . > > > > > >