Re: [LTP] [PATCH] runtest/ipc: Add some IPC syscalls test-cases

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] runtest/ipc: Add some IPC syscalls test-cases

[chrubis]

Hi!
> > Signed-off-by: Sedat Dilek<sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >   runtest/ipc | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 60 insertions(+)
> 
> NAK. Duplication is generally a bad idea.
> This have the side effect of running the same tests twice for people 
> that run ipc and syscalls test scenarios.

Hmm, this is a valid point.

Thinking of the ideal way, it may be more data driven framework with a
list of all tests anotated with some group labels. I noted this for the
planned testdriver rewrite.

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] runtest/ipc: Add some IPC syscalls test-cases

[chrubis]

Hi!
> >> Add IPC syscalls test-cases from "runtest/syscalls" file also to
> >> "runtest/ipc" for people interested in running IPC tests only.
> >>
> >> Run via './runltp -f ipc'.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Sedat Dilek<sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >>   runtest/ipc | 60
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>   1 file changed, 60 insertions(+)
> >
> >
> > NAK. Duplication is generally a bad idea.
> > This have the side effect of running the same tests twice for people that
> > run ipc and syscalls test scenarios.
> >
> 
> The background of this was an issue in Linux-Next.
> The ipc test-cases were fine, but syscalls test-cases revealed that
> sth. was wrong in that Linux-Next release.
> For me it was not clear to also test the syscalls.
> 
> So, what is with the idea of a "runtest/syscalls-ipc" file (my
> original "v1" patch, this here is "v2")?

I think that we can go with the v1 for now and figure out something
better for the new test execution framework. Are you OK with that?

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] runtest/ipc: Add some IPC syscalls test-cases

[chrubis]

Hi!
> >>> Signed-off-by: Sedat Dilek<sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>    runtest/ipc | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>    1 file changed, 60 insertions(+)
> >> NAK. Duplication is generally a bad idea.
> >> This have the side effect of running the same tests twice for people
> >> that run ipc and syscalls test scenarios.
> > Hmm, this is a valid point.
> >
> > Thinking of the ideal way, it may be more data driven framework with a
> > list of all tests anotated with some group labels. I noted this for the
> > planned testdriver rewrite.
> >
> 
> We can easily support this with existing infrastructure if we add some 
> structure to the test case tags.
> For instance on runtest/syscalls, one could use:
> msgctl01_ipc
> msgctl02_ipc
> ...
>
> Then when calling runltp, one can use -s option to filter tests cases, 
> e.g. ./runltp -f syscalls -s '*_ipc'
> 
> At Texas Instruments we use following convention for TAG names
> <AREA>_<SCOPE>_<TYPE>_<ID>
> 
> 

That is no go, at least here we have database of testruns for different
distributions and renaming the testcases tags will break the regression
detection. So I would preffer solution that adds a metadata without
renaming the current test tags. The problem is that ltp-pan and runltp
are so horribly outdated and unmaintaned that adding functionality to
these is out of question.

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list