From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C2E8C433F5 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 12:54:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id E94863C9CAB for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 13:54:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (in-6.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16F943C24D6 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 13:53:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F9DE1400075 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 13:53:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A93991F390; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 12:53:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1644411230; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=8H+Wp/gnJ6wBl8C3cLHO7Re823Q0eh2j91axNYCeAJk=; b=vK7Io/RchWBEnDcXfr42h3iRzE7lTByWZ3zpmgvkO3sJH8w/3+O2V/k9OPsJPtbjqV774d HhB+vIYjqETwV1pW8a4tm44d/YXy7mRuEi+0l+6sRABYr/JG2aUihmc4/2pt9d4H48k9M3 fgIA4oGyCnd2bHgaJhwd/7ISczjbV5I= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1644411230; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=8H+Wp/gnJ6wBl8C3cLHO7Re823Q0eh2j91axNYCeAJk=; b=ifGKDvDBLk1UyyJzyQ1ScjsHD3WxlLSI9nwAVlM67u83AzLrKMCKQdYZkHxvMe27jllWbj cUktMpv9pHg+58Bw== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 845F413D2F; Wed, 9 Feb 2022 12:53:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id q0LsHl65A2JlNQAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Wed, 09 Feb 2022 12:53:50 +0000 Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2022 13:53:48 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Li Wang Message-ID: References: <20220127171455.9809-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <61F609C7.1080803@fujitsu.com> <620095ED.1040808@fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-6.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [RFC PATCH 1/1] lib: Print in summary also tests not run at all X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: "ltp@lists.linux.it" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi Li, Xu, > > In fact, we don't have mandatory rules that TAPSS or TFAIL only can > > occur one time. a example ie memcontrol02.c > Right, that is my hesitant part for counting that. > Seems many tests abuse the TPASS|TFAIL for defining test fail bound. OK, while it'd be useful for some tests, it'd be confusing due this for other. I guess printing (tst_test->tcnt * test_variants) number can be confusing either. Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp