workflows.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
To: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Cc: "Masahiro Yamada" <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
	"Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@kernel.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Willy Tarreau" <w@1wt.eu>,
	"Thomas Weißschuh" <linux@weissschuh.net>,
	"Brendan Higgins" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
	"Rae Moar" <rmoar@google.com>, "Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>,
	"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
	"Nicolas Schier" <nicolas.schier@linux.dev>,
	"Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	"Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	"Alexandre Ghiti" <alex@ghiti.fr>,
	"Christophe Leroy" <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	workflows@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/16] kunit: tool: Add test for nested test result reporting
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 15:20:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250620151847-953c56f6-5a20-4e46-82ce-8b58fd409250@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABVgOSmTXj_t0_nJyjhc=mvpPkGGW5D4qGd0WajmVgVyMgd_Hg@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 05:37:39PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
> <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Currently there is no test validating the result reporting from nested
> > tests. Add one, it will also be used to validate upcoming changes to the
> > nested test parsing.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > ---
> 
> This looks good, modulo a couple of minor suggestions below.
> 
> Regardless,
> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> 
> Cheers,
> -- David
> 
> >  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py                           | 9 +++++++++
> >  .../kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log       | 7 +++++++
> >  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > index bbba921e0eacb18663abfcabb2bccf330d8666f5..691cde9b030f7729128490c1bdb42ccee1967ad6 100755
> > --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > @@ -165,6 +165,15 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase):
> >                 self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
> >                 self.assertEqual(result.counts.errors, 0)
> >
> > +       def test_parse_failed_nested_tests_log(self):
> > +               nested_log = test_data_path('test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log')
> > +               with open(nested_log) as file:
> > +                       result = kunit_parser.parse_run_tests(file.readlines(), stdout)
> > +               self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
> > +               self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 2)
> > +               self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[0].status)
> 
> Is it worth also testing the value of the nested test's result here? i.e.,
> self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE,
> result.subtests[0].subtests[0].status)

This should be result.subtests[1].subtests[0].status.
But Ack and done.

> > +               self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[1].status)
> > +
> >         def test_no_header(self):
> >                 empty_log = test_data_path('test_is_test_passed-no_tests_run_no_header.log')
> >                 with open(empty_log) as file:
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..835816e0a07715a514f5f5afab1b6250037feaf4
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> > @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
> > +KTAP version 1
> > +1..2
> > +not ok 1 subtest 1
> > +    KTAP version 1
> > +    1..1
> > +        not ok 1 test 1
> > +not ok 2 subtest 2
> 
> Having these named 'subtest 1' and 'test 1' is a bit confusing to me
> (as it implies the outer tests are subtests of the inner ones, which
> isn't right).
> 
> Could we either swap 'subtest' and 'test' here, or -- if we want to
> preserve the match between 'subtest' here and the subtest in the
> python code -- label the inner one something like 'subsubtest'?

Ack.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-20 13:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-11  7:38 [PATCH v3 00/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 01/16] kbuild: userprogs: avoid duplicating of flags inherited from kernel Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11 13:52   ` Nicolas Schier
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 02/16] kbuild: userprogs: also inherit byte order and ABI " Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11 13:53   ` Nicolas Schier
2025-06-16 14:49   ` Masahiro Yamada
2025-06-17  7:39     ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-18  1:14       ` Masahiro Yamada
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 03/16] init: re-add CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11 14:04   ` Nicolas Schier
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 04/16] kbuild: userprogs: add nolibc support Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11 14:09   ` Nicolas Schier
2025-06-16 15:35   ` Masahiro Yamada
2025-06-17  7:59     ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-18  1:15       ` Masahiro Yamada
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 05/16] kbuild: introduce CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 06/16] kbuild: doc: add label for userprogs section Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 07/16] kbuild: introduce blob framework Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-16 15:38   ` Masahiro Yamada
2025-06-17  7:50     ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 08/16] kunit: tool: Add test for nested test result reporting Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:37   ` David Gow
2025-06-20 13:20     ` Thomas Weißschuh [this message]
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 09/16] kunit: tool: Don't overwrite test status based on subtest counts Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:37   ` David Gow
2025-06-20 13:23     ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 10/16] kunit: tool: Parse skipped tests from kselftest.h Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:37   ` David Gow
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 11/16] kunit: Always descend into kunit directory during build Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:47   ` David Gow
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 12/16] kunit: qemu_configs: loongarch: Enable LSX/LSAX Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:37   ` David Gow
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 13/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:47   ` David Gow
2025-06-20 13:43     ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 14/16] kunit: uapi: Add example for UAPI tests Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:47   ` David Gow
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 15/16] kunit: uapi: Introduce preinit executable Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:48   ` David Gow
2025-06-11  7:38 ` [PATCH v3 16/16] kunit: uapi: Validate usability of /proc Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:48   ` David Gow
2025-06-20 13:50     ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20  9:37 ` [PATCH v3 00/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework David Gow
2025-06-20 13:18   ` Thomas Weißschuh

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=20250620151847-953c56f6-5a20-4e46-82ce-8b58fd409250@linutronix.de \
    --to=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alex@ghiti.fr \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=brendan.higgins@linux.dev \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=davidgow@google.com \
    --cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux@weissschuh.net \
    --cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolas.schier@linux.dev \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=rmoar@google.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=w@1wt.eu \
    --cc=workflows@vger.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