On 07/01/2017 01:33 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 06/30/2017 10:13 AM, Paul Elder wrote: >> On 06/30/2017 08:18 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: >>> This patch series converts breakpoint_test_arm64 to TAP13 output. Uses >>> ksft_ var arg msg functions as needed. Changed to ensure parent is the >>> one that increments test counters. >>> >>> breakpoint_test, step_after_suspend_test, membarrier tests are changed >>> to use ksft_ var arg msg functions as needed. >>> >>> This patch series depends on Paul Elder's >>> >>> [PATCH v2 0/2] kselftest: make ksft_* output functions variadic >>> The v2 series doesn't append newline and makes it easier to use. >>> >>> Shuah Khan (4): >>> selftests: breakpoint_test: use ksft_* var arg msg api >>> selftests: breakpoints: step_after_suspend_test use ksft_* var arg msg >>> api >>> selftests: breakpoints: breakpoint_test_arm64: convert test to use >>> TAP13 >>> selftests: membarrier: use ksft_* var arg msg api >>> >>> .../selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test.c | 28 ++++--- >>> .../selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c | 94 >>> +++++++++++++--------- >>> .../breakpoints/step_after_suspend_test.c | 59 ++++++++------ >>> .../testing/selftests/membarrier/membarrier_test.c | 91 >>> ++++++++++----------- >>> 4 files changed, 148 insertions(+), 124 deletions(-) >>> >> Looks good to me. >> >> Although I am wondering why you said earlier that you were going to go with >> my v1, while this depends on v2. >> >> Thank you, >> >> Paul >> >> > > Yeah my bad! > > I was playing with both v1 and v2 for my testing. I lost track of which one > worked > well. I had to start from square one and re-test. Oh okay. Understood.
> > v2 by not appending newline, allows custom formats in individual test > messages. > For example, a test wants to use tabs between two ksft_print_msg() calls or > _report_ > messages. v2 is flexible and works better and leds itself well. Users can > just pass > the format and expect it to stick. I see. I didn't notice this advantage. Though if a test wants to separate two ksft_print_msg()s with tabs, wouldn't there still be a # between them? > > If there are no issues with this series, I plan to apply your v2 series and > this > series later on today or early tomorrow to linux-kselftest next. I have no objections. > > If we have this infrastructure in place, we will be able to make progress in > the > next release with the TAP13 conversion of other tests. Indeed. Although I'm having trouble with tests that fork. Thank you! Paul > > thanks, > -- Shuah > > thanks, > -- Shuah >
