linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] kunit: tool: Do not error on tests without test plans

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 27 Oct 2021 15:12:52 -0700
From:   Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
To:     David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Rae Moar <rmr167@...il.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
        kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] kunit: tool: Do not error on tests without test plans

On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 6:37 PM David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> The (K)TAP spec encourages test output to begin with a 'test plan': a
> count of the number of tests being run of the form:
> 1..n
>
> However, some test suites might not know the number of subtests in
> advance (for example, KUnit's parameterised tests use a generator
> function). In this case, it's not possible to print the test plan in
> advance.
>
> kunit_tool already parses test output which doesn't contain a plan, but
> reports an error. Since we want to use nested subtests with KUnit
> paramterised tests, remove this error.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>

Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>

This looks to be unchanged from v1.
Looks good to me given kunit itself will report SKIPPED for parameterised tests.

> ---
>  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py    | 5 ++---
>  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 5 ++++-
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> index 3355196d0515..50ded55c168c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> @@ -340,8 +340,8 @@ def parse_test_plan(lines: LineStream, test: Test) -> bool:
>         """
>         Parses test plan line and stores the expected number of subtests in
>         test object. Reports an error if expected count is 0.
> -       Returns False and reports missing test plan error if fails to parse
> -       test plan.
> +       Returns False and sets expected_count to None if there is no valid test
> +       plan.
>
>         Accepted format:
>         - '1..[number of subtests]'
> @@ -356,7 +356,6 @@ def parse_test_plan(lines: LineStream, test: Test) -> bool:
>         match = TEST_PLAN.match(lines.peek())
>         if not match:
>                 test.expected_count = None
> -               test.add_error('missing plan line!')
>                 return False
>         test.log.append(lines.pop())
>         expected_count = int(match.group(1))
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> index 9c4126731457..bc8793145713 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> @@ -191,7 +191,10 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase):
>                         result = kunit_parser.parse_run_tests(
>                                 kunit_parser.extract_tap_lines(
>                                 file.readlines()))
> -               self.assertEqual(2, result.test.counts.errors)
> +               # A missing test plan is not an error.
> +               self.assertEqual(0, result.test.counts.errors)
> +               # All tests should be accounted for.
> +               self.assertEqual(10, result.test.counts.total())
>                 self.assertEqual(
>                         kunit_parser.TestStatus.SUCCESS,
>                         result.status)
> --
> 2.33.0.1079.g6e70778dc9-goog
>