linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] selftests/nolibc: report: print test status

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:   Mon, 10 Jul 2023 03:44:07 +0800
From:   Zhangjin Wu <falcon@...ylab.org>
To:     w@....eu
Cc:     arnd@...db.de, falcon@...ylab.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, thomas@...ch.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] selftests/nolibc: report: print test status

Hi, Willy

> Hi Zhangjin,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 05:02:26PM +0800, Zhangjin Wu wrote:
> > Hi, Willy
> > 
> > As you suggested, the 'status: [success|warning|failure]' info is added
> > to the summary line, with additional newlines around this line to
> > extrude the status info. at the same time, the total tests is printed,
> > the passed, skipped and failed values are aligned with '%03d'.
> 
> So as I mentioned with some commits, I *do* find it important to
> preserve the convenience of grepping for a single word to from 20
> test reports at once and visually check all statuses (and in this
> sense I like your preference for aligning the words to make them
> more readable). But having to guess some grep context and see the
> output garbled clearly does the opposite of what we were looking
> for in my opinion.

Sorry for confusing you, hope my just reply [1] explained the 'newlines'
patch, as you pointed out in another reply, perhaps I need to write more
about the deeper 'background' idea of the patch, but sometimes, I'm also
worried about writing too much, for example, some info may be 'obvious'
but I spent too much statements, I will improve as possible as I can,
thanks.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230709192652.97668-1-falcon@tinylab.org/

> Also, I think there's no need for having 5
> separate patches to add/remove a line feed. Better discuss an
> output format that matches everyone's needs and change it at once,
> this will make the patch more reviewable than having individual
> changes like this.

That's right, the patches are split here is just for the last three are
new to our previous discuss, perhaps need more discuss, in the future, I
will propose the ideas before send the patches, just as we did for some
other patches.

Thanks,
Zhangjin

> 
> thanks,
> willy