On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 11:15 AM, John Admanski <[email protected]>wrote:
> Right, but with this patch I would think that instead of prepending args to > the control file like in you original patch you could instead pass them > through via the new -a args? I don't know that it's any neater, from the > server point of view, but it at least passes them through the same codepath > in the client. I considered that too but there's some added complexity/fragility with going through shell args, python tuple, back to shell args... and escaping white-space, etc. This approach seemed simpler from that point of view. Darin > That's more of an implementation detail, though; I'm happy enough with > these two patches at least preserving feature parity between client-only and > client+server uses. > > -- John > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Darin Petkov <[email protected]> wrote: > >> John, >> >> Attached is a separate patch that adds support for args to >> client/bin/autotest. The downside of doing it this way is that it implements >> a separate path for passing args to client-side control. The benefit is that >> it's simple. >> >> Darin >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 8:33 AM, John Admanski <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> I was looking at this a bit more, and I still see an issue; now you can't >>> write code that uses args that just works on a straight client, you have to >>> be launching the client via autoserv. I suppose that's not a huge problem, >>> since autoserv is the only way that you can set args anyway, but I guess I'd >>> just envisioned a grander patch that actually added support for command-line >>> args to client/bin/autotest, and then just used server/autotest.py to pass >>> through any autoserv args. >>> >>> Still, I think it's not a huge deal. I'm just a little worried about the >>> continued trend of more and more code being written that just assumes you're >>> using all the higher layers to run your tests. These days it seems everyone >>> just wants to write client tests that assume you're using autoserv, or even >>> assumes you're using a full scheduler setup. >>> >>> -- John >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Darin Petkov <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 2:43 PM, John Admanski <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> This should probably use %r instead of %s. In practice I think >>>>> repr(args) and str(args) will end up being the same, but in principle repr >>>>> is supposed to be the inverse of eval so it's the more correct choice of >>>>> formatting. >>>> >>>> >>>> Good point. Updated the patch. PTAL. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Darin Petkov <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> A simple patch to propagate user args (autoserv -a/--args) to the >>>>>> client-side control file. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ Autotest mailing list [email protected] http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest
