Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Apr 2023 12:43:49 -0400 | From | Peter Xu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 16/29] selftests/mm: UFFDIO_API test |
| |
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 09:59:50AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > There is ksft_print_msg, ksft_test_result, ksft_test_result_fail, ... do we > maybe want to convert properly to ksft while already at it?
Yes, I started with trying to use that but found that there're not a lot of things that I can leverage.
Starting with ksft_set_plan() - I think this is something we call first. I want the current unit test to skip everything if UFFD API test failed here, then I need to feed in a dynamic number of "plan" into ksft_set_plan(). But I never know after I ran the 1st test..
I can call ksft_set_plan() later than this, but it misses a few tests which also looks weird.
It also seems to not really help anything at all and not obvious to use. E.g. ksft_finished() will reference ksft_plan then it'll trigger ksft_exit_fail() but here I want to make it SKIP if the 1st test failed simply because the kernel probably doesn't have CONFIG_USERFAULTFD.
Another example: I never figured what does x{fail|pass|skip} meant in the header.. e.g. ksft_inc_xfail_cnt() is used nowhere so I cannot reference either. Then I don't know when I should increase them.
In short, to make the unit test behave as expected, I figured I'll just write these few helpers and that's good enough for this unit test. That takes perhaps 5 min anyway and isn't hugely bad for an unit test.
Then I keep the exit code matching kselftests (KSFT_SKIP, etc.).
What I can do here, though, is at least reuse the counters, e.g:
ksft_inc_pass_cnt() / ksft_inc_fail_cnt()
There's no ksft_inc_skip_cnt() so, maybe, I can just reuse ksft_inc_xskip_cnt() assuming that counts "skip"s?
Let me know if you have better ideas, I'll be happy to switch in that case.
Thanks,
-- Peter Xu
| |