From: Geliang Tang <geliang@kernel.org>
To: Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@kernel.org>, mptcp@lists.linux.dev
Cc: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mptcp-next v5 02/12] selftests: mptcp: sockopt: print every test result
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:51:06 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0869f65fc6c67394f14288b6033baeaf89f81606.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7ff17cb1-0c1f-45ac-b797-17594a00a215@kernel.org>
On Wed, 2024-02-28 at 10:13 +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Hi Geliang,
>
> On 28/02/2024 08:57, Geliang Tang wrote:
> > On Mon, 2024-02-26 at 13:40 +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> > > Hi Geliang,
> > >
> > > On 26/02/2024 10:43, Geliang Tang wrote:
> > > > From: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
> > > >
> > > > Only total test results are printed out in mptcp_sockopt.sh:
> > > >
> > > > PASS: all packets had packet mark set
> > > > PASS: SOL_MPTCP getsockopt has expected information
> > > > PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -t tcp
> > > > PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -6 -t tcp
> > > > PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -r tcp
> > > > PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -6 -r tcp
> > > >
> > > > This patch prints more info for every test result in each test
> > > > group:
> > > >
> > > > transfer ipv4 [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > mark ipv4 [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > transfer ipv6 [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > mark ipv6 [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > PASS: all packets had packet mark set
> > > > sockopt v4 [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > sockopt v6 [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > PASS: SOL_MPTCP getsockopt has expected information
> > > > TCP_INQ: -t tcp [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -t tcp
> > > > TCP_INQ: -6 -t tcp [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -6 -t tcp
> > > > TCP_INQ: -r tcp [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -r tcp
> > > > TCP_INQ: -6 -r tcp [
> > > > OK ]
> > > > PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -6 -r tcp
> > > > TCP_INQ: -r tcp -t tcp [
> > > > OK ]
> > >
> > > Please clearly explain why this is interesting, even if it looks
> > > obvious.
> > >
> > > Here, I don't know if this patch makes sense or not: to me, the
> > > output
> > > is now confusing because there is a mix of '[ OK ]' and 'PASS'.
> > > Maybe:
> > >
> > > - remove all the "PASS: xxx"? → I don't see what it brings more
> > > - (or convert existing "PASS: xxx" and "FAIL: xxx" to use "[ OK
> > > ]"?
> > > But
> > > there are fewer details)
> >
> > This patch uses to match the output of this script:
> >
> > INFO: PASS: all packets had packet mark set
> > INFO: PASS: SOL_MPTCP getsockopt has expected information
> > INFO: PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -t tcp
> > INFO: PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -6 -t tcp
> > INFO: PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -r tcp
> > INFO: PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -6 -r tcp
> > INFO: PASS: TCP_INQ cmsg/ioctl -r tcp -t tcp
> >
> > with the test results of it:
> >
> > ok 1 - mptcp_sockopt: mark ipv4
> > ok 2 - mptcp_sockopt: transfer ipv4
> > ok 3 - mptcp_sockopt: mark ipv6
> > ok 4 - mptcp_sockopt: transfer ipv6
> > ok 5 - mptcp_sockopt: sockopt v4
> > ok 6 - mptcp_sockopt: sockopt v6
> > ok 7 - mptcp_sockopt: TCP_INQ: -t tcp
> > ok 8 - mptcp_sockopt: TCP_INQ: -6 -t tcp
> > ok 9 - mptcp_sockopt: TCP_INQ: -r tcp
> > ok 10 - mptcp_sockopt: TCP_INQ: -6 -r tcp
> > ok 11 - mptcp_sockopt: TCP_INQ: -r tcp -t tcp
> >
> > This patch is prepared for the coming printing counter patch,
> > otherwise
> > the two output results may have different serial numbers, which can
> > be
> > confusing.
>
> Yes, I agree that it makes sense to print the individual results. But
> what I wanted to say is that maybe we no longer need these "INFO:
> PASS:"
> lines in the output?
>
> e.g. only printing this:
>
> # 01 Transfer ipv4 [ OK ]
> # 02 Mark ipv4 [ OK ]
> # 03 Transfer ipv6 [ OK ]
> # 04 Mark ipv6 [ OK ]
> # 05 SOL_MPTCP sockopt v4 [ OK ]
> # 06 SOL_MPTCP sockopt v6 [ OK ]
> # 07 TCP_INQ: -t tcp [ OK ]
> # 08 TCP_INQ: -6 -t tcp [ OK ]
> # 09 TCP_INQ: -r tcp [ OK ]
> # 10 TCP_INQ: -6 -r tcp [ OK ]
> # 11 TCP_INQ: -r tcp -t tcp [ OK ]
Yes, this is much better. Will update it in next version.
>
> I think these 'INFO: PASS:' lines don't bring more info, no? If they
> do,
> we can always modify what is printed above.
>
> (While at it, it might look nicer to do: s/ipv4/IPv4/ (or s/ipv4/v4)
> if
> we easily control that, I didn't check)
's/ipv4/v4' is better, will update them.
Thanks,
-Geliang
>
>
> BTW, thank you for the replies on the different patches, it helps
> here
> because there were a lot of comments on this v5.
>
> Cheers,
> Matt
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-28 9:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-26 9:43 [PATCH mptcp-next v5 00/12] add helpers and vars in mptcp_lib.sh, part 3 Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 01/12] selftests: mptcp: capitalize ok/fail/skip Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:40 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-28 7:47 ` Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 02/12] selftests: mptcp: sockopt: print every test result Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:40 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-28 7:57 ` Geliang Tang
2024-02-28 9:13 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-28 9:51 ` Geliang Tang [this message]
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 03/12] selftests: mptcp: connect: fix misaligned OK/FAIL Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:40 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-28 7:58 ` Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 04/12] selftests: mptcp: print test results with colors Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:41 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-28 8:06 ` Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 05/12] selftests: mptcp: connect: add dedicated port counter Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:41 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-28 8:09 ` Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 06/12] selftests: mptcp: connect: print out ping tests info Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:41 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-28 8:31 ` Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 07/12] selftests: mptcp: print test results with counters Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:41 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-28 8:23 ` Geliang Tang
2024-02-28 10:20 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 08/12] selftests: mptcp: move test_fail out of check_expected_one Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:41 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 09/12] selftests: mptcp: extract mptcp_lib_check_expected Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:41 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 10/12] selftests: mptcp: export event macros in mptcp_lib Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:42 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 11/12] selftests: mptcp: add mptcp_lib_verify_listener_events Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 12:42 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-02-26 9:43 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 12/12] selftests: mptcp: use KSFT_SKIP/KSFT_PASS/KSFT_FAIL Geliang Tang
2024-02-26 10:33 ` selftests: mptcp: use KSFT_SKIP/KSFT_PASS/KSFT_FAIL: Tests Results MPTCP CI
2024-02-26 12:40 ` [PATCH mptcp-next v5 00/12] add helpers and vars in mptcp_lib.sh, part 3 Matthieu Baerts
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0869f65fc6c67394f14288b6033baeaf89f81606.camel@kernel.org \
--to=geliang@kernel.org \
--cc=matttbe@kernel.org \
--cc=mptcp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tanggeliang@kylinos.cn \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox