linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] selftests/mm: Report unique test names for each cow test
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2025 18:55:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2117dfe4-befc-4fe4-9b5f-184433299494@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d35bdd4d-d210-434d-b259-97a4bb93c64e@sirena.org.uk>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1140 bytes --]

On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 06:48:19PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 06:57:38PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:

> > I agree that printing something in case KSFT_PASS does not make sense
> > indeed.
> > 
> > But if something goes wrong (KSFT_FAIL/KSFT_SKIP) I would expect a reason in
> > all cases.
> > 
> > IIRC kselftest_harness.h behaves that way:
> 
> That's mostly just it being chatty because it uses an assert based idiom
> rather than explicit pass/fail reports, it's a lot less common for
> things written directly to kselftest.h where it's for example fairly
> common to see a result detected directly in a ksft_result() call.
> That does tend to be quite helpful when looking at the results, you
> don't need to dig out the logs so often.

As was the case with the prior:

        /* Finally, check if we read what we expected. */
-       ksft_test_result(!memcmp(mem, tmp, size),
-                        "Longterm R/W pin is reliable\n");
+       if (!memcmp(mem, tmp, size))
+               log_test_result(KSFT_PASS);
+       else
+               log_test_result(KSFT_FAIL);
 


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-03 17:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-27 16:04 [PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/mm: cow and gup_longterm cleanups Mark Brown
2025-05-27 16:04 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] selftests/mm: Use standard ksft_finished() in cow and gup_longterm Mark Brown
2025-05-27 16:04 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] selftests/mm: Add helper for logging test start and results Mark Brown
2025-06-03 12:37   ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-03 18:27     ` Mark Brown
2025-06-03 20:18       ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-27 16:04 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] selftests/mm: Report unique test names for each cow test Mark Brown
2025-06-03 12:51   ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-03 13:21     ` Mark Brown
2025-06-03 14:15       ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-03 14:58         ` Mark Brown
2025-06-03 15:06           ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-03 15:22             ` Mark Brown
2025-06-03 16:57               ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-03 17:48                 ` Mark Brown
2025-06-03 17:55                   ` Mark Brown [this message]
2025-06-03 20:21                     ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-27 16:04 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] selftests/mm: Fix test result reporting in gup_longterm Mark Brown
2025-06-03 12:36   ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-03 13:05     ` Mark Brown
2025-06-05 16:00   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-05 16:15     ` Mark Brown
2025-06-05 16:26       ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-05 16:42         ` Mark Brown
2025-06-05 16:55           ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-05 17:19             ` Mark Brown
2025-06-05 17:34               ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-05 18:24                 ` Mark Brown
2025-06-05 17:09           ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-05 17:38             ` Mark Brown
2025-06-05 17:47               ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-05 18:29                 ` Mark Brown
2025-06-05 18:35                   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-05 16:48       ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-05 20:32         ` Andrew Morton

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=2117dfe4-befc-4fe4-9b5f-184433299494@sirena.org.uk \
    --to=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    /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