Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp1442664pxj; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 14:46:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxBZhWUJAgS8Y0l2e3dUQSmoeS5VYSI2qX1ODuXxGKHwTM52fXlPS8E+mbQaIhsDEEGU8f0 X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:2459:: with SMTP id a25mr6113582ejb.306.1622843204712; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 14:46:44 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1622843204; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=FGEMTBHwa4Br7qo9+pTYFo7E4Gnr2Gsu9XcvYJQMVEIIu2x7kNXRQ5xRG2RhxDA9ee WgGZRCSK6Zrufl1+13p16/Ffr1mlCTuWOeIy9P+7IM6ghaEJWAYH0fQWMQU17fjTvgKp i4vVORmlHlC5gz/TyvaCqaVJhUJLYP4N1Edr5FfZ65LA4vh0nm1Ux7pMUOi4/aW/a48D paIPRr0lwkEQG9MqNDBNNqrvDGll0DHOvuAj3G2clxK/+xBObVGruU8z0H6VTC/GjoRD gabX39Zhw3BDTABrDy55FX6hlWMteEUbay999cnL4WCvCVsaOp1IUcZLUZXhfyjJ2lnx bWgA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=pDIwKF3tXJwdhNB+DHHLy82arK7mNJOODtr324WveQ8=; b=uKCqzFOhn8d4zJajH0mf+n+Mmr92sp+gi9HqCXMIYW1o7t7J3L+7Sw32RYBMRuHSGm KyGe2xvW1OSmAHA1YP9w3/ZMMt6CRmXWSp73MSTu32EuaXuaIDLa+nlD2JvsVEJxFUaL 5crLcgUXLcnc55gAWH3RvtloAbDW/xV20d0InrScm6i7MoK+tUkGcmnF5s/4d7Nn/kEC fMJH9Asft6TQaNU23VzLcb8JIMvkjNb1KOfVo50ga8pxMIVpbrsmJfJcjtz2zmptTyQP sDgbZOX6fFaIKAifl+CIEdZFT4wefsbq+v37IYxRsCYFsJ275uP9vdO/sXbB0RYND3ai gRug== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=e41RXUqd; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g13si5855360ejb.117.2021.06.04.14.46.22; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 14:46:44 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=e41RXUqd; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231527AbhFDVrF (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 4 Jun 2021 17:47:05 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f51.google.com ([209.85.166.51]:41568 "EHLO mail-io1-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231530AbhFDVrD (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jun 2021 17:47:03 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f51.google.com with SMTP id p66so9792008iod.8 for ; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 14:45:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=pDIwKF3tXJwdhNB+DHHLy82arK7mNJOODtr324WveQ8=; b=e41RXUqdJchuOB1w7K6NzyXtZGfne8AOS/sZPU047rJyTfwgHCq+qOHEHeIjSMEKSo PSEtOs7LP9MD45rauKeCzYDTBdj3ivoy7InidmkFLs7ufFfcMFVxMwMGv3+l5Y+yY+eH 67QfgAHj/ksfBz7BV+ZcqpiYCaC4Zqgz/WGk3lqpb0Mzgns1qfe/qJDLuPbvwhuecbsQ HLUddJ4wn2WCjVNoMhx1tO0h0St9ay5nsLUtJYJmxx7wz+AJxvssgk43XD6bBWlKumV6 HqPONZq2+d4WjY3VqwdyrnLDRi3fYcrsAukIt9ZjF+tNGxOAgk/ReGDwnB1JAiSikb8j 0Glg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pDIwKF3tXJwdhNB+DHHLy82arK7mNJOODtr324WveQ8=; b=eZFurS8kvztL3IDtGl0a3HQN5uBzAjLFVYHuiX0K7VcFVpYBLHaAkhFIGFx3QxHgCu 52Z0vl4sc+hKLoG9UkGOba8y28ZPWyb9LjyQo+Iq8CW97lGVM3451zsMoCVvaybYGEVs gEuoia8oJx+GBkoQrel2mNWTfqk32cmNBx8YhXGbiLLOOKYKmnuJzx5z36VkkZZiaNhX vXzyf0D5wLYm+reV1qk5PDsSL4hVVsrNIvWj5xxgrhoDB2M4GhkBbL+Eh3h/VtzhbNa7 XDkAWaeKDrIZHOb29/b9BAts/8pgED1wZy9BNV2T3tktVFG5eXr4y9eY5QiH1bKOmoJG Kvzg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532kyujEoB8uz0eU2gzlP5LxQTrGhpdu+iGXcHdsrfqUp3lAshRa 3QyYXc238nLK1knp9+e90WunYmSrECMM7wLYJ9Qpqg== X-Received: by 2002:a02:335c:: with SMTP id k28mr5867362jak.4.1622843055875; Fri, 04 Jun 2021 14:44:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210528075932.347154-1-davidgow@google.com> <20210528075932.347154-2-davidgow@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Daniel Latypov Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 14:44:04 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] kunit: tool: Support skipped tests in kunit_tool To: Brendan Higgins Cc: David Gow , Alan Maguire , Shuah Khan , Marco Elver , KUnit Development , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 2:30 PM 'Brendan Higgins' via KUnit Development wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 8:46 AM Daniel Latypov wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 12:59 AM David Gow wrote: > > > > > > Add support for the SKIP directive to kunit_tool's TAP parser. > > > > > > Skipped tests now show up as such in the printed summary. The number of > > > skipped tests is counted, and if all tests in a suite are skipped, the > > > suite is also marked as skipped. Otherwise, skipped tests do affect the > > > suite result. > > > > > > Example output: > > > [00:22:34] ======== [SKIPPED] example_skip ======== > > > [00:22:34] [SKIPPED] example_skip_test # SKIP this test should be skipped > > > [00:22:34] [SKIPPED] example_mark_skipped_test # SKIP this test should be skipped > > > [00:22:34] ============================================================ > > > [00:22:34] Testing complete. 2 tests run. 0 failed. 0 crashed. 2 skipped. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Gow > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov > > > > Some minor remarks, but this looks good to me. > > > > Though I'm surprised there has not been any bikeshedding done about > > the color of the SKIPPED output. > > So I'll throw an opinion out there. > > I think yellow is fine, but I did somewhat recently change another > > similar tool to go from yellow => cyan for SKIPPED. The motivation > > there was to have a color for "flaky" tests that stood out, and the > > most appropriate ANSI color seemed to be yellow (between green for > > PASSED and red for FAILED). > > And I don't know if KUnit tool will ever get to the point where we > > automatically rerun tests on failure, as I can see an argument for > > that logic living a layer above. > > I do have some sympathy for using a different color for each type of > message. I am not arguing against cyan, but I am also OK with yellow. > However, if we get to the point where we support flaky warnings, what > if we used orange for flaky? We can always change the colors later. I don't seriously think this should hold up the patch. I was partially just bemused that no one had chimed in about the color, as that is the apocryphal thing to bikeshed. Was curious if broaching the topic would elicit any response, but given the silence, I think we can truly say that no one cares. Also, orange only works if we're going to assume 256-color support, which I'd be against*. Given that, our options are: Black, Red, Green, Yellow, Blue, Magenta, Cyan, White (and the "bright" variations thereof) So yellow is the closest we'd get, which is why I'd made the shift to cyan for the aforementioned other projects. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/CAFd5g44VS%3D%3D1yULMRS-JMxrArj9GFJRkuDCxoxnZHcj3PVbFHg%40mail.gmail.com.