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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABVgOSmTXj_t0_nJyjhc=mvpPkGGW5D4qGd0WajmVgVyMgd_Hg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 17:37:39 +0800
From: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
To: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, 
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, 
	Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>, 
	Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>, Rae Moar <rmoar@...gle.com>, 
	Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, 
	Nicolas Schier <nicolas.schier@...ux.dev>, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, 
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, 
	Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>, Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, 
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, 
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, 
	workflows@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/16] kunit: tool: Add test for nested test result reporting

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.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@...utronix.de>
> ---

This looks good, modulo a couple of minor suggestions below.

Regardless,
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.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)


> +               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'?


>
> --
> 2.49.0
>

Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5281 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ