Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   frowand.list@gmail.com
To:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Cc:     Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] of: unittest: print pass messages at PR_INFO level
Date:   Thu, 10 Feb 2022 17:08:19 -0600
Message-Id: <20220210230819.3303212-1-frowand.list@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com>

Printing the devicetree unittest pass message for each passed test
creates much console verbosity.  The existing pass messages are
printed at loglevel KERN_DEBUG so they will not print by default.

Change default to print the pass messages at loglevel PR_INFO so
they will print with the default console loglevel.

The test community expects either a pass or a fail message for each
test in a test suite.  The messages are typically post-processed to
report pass/fail results.

Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com>
---

One review comment to similar previous patch "of: unittest: print
pass message as same lovlevel as fail" suggested to also change
the text of the pass message to include "PASS" instead of "pass".
I would rather leave the text unchanged to minimize churn for any
existing users of the message.  It is my intention to change the
pass and fail messages to KTAP version 2 format as soon as that
version of the specification is completed.

 drivers/of/unittest.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest.c b/drivers/of/unittest.c
index 70992103c07d..9012e6900965 100644
--- a/drivers/of/unittest.c
+++ b/drivers/of/unittest.c
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static struct unittest_results {
 		pr_err("FAIL %s():%i " fmt, __func__, __LINE__, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
 	} else { \
 		unittest_results.passed++; \
-		pr_debug("pass %s():%i\n", __func__, __LINE__); \
+		pr_info("pass %s():%i\n", __func__, __LINE__); \
 	} \
 	failed; \
 })
-- 
Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com>