Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:3;
Date:   Fri, 3 Nov 2023 11:54:59 +0200 (EET)
From:   =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Ilpo_J=E4rvinen?= <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
cc:     linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com>,
        =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Maciej_Wiecz=F3r-Retman?= 
        <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/24] selftests/resctrl: Introduce generalized test
 framework
In-Reply-To: <56769c01-e21d-4775-94f0-ef9f863c1e92@intel.com>
Message-ID: <ffdeb9a9-c066-19c-9898-c2bdf632cef1@linux.intel.com>
References: <20231024092634.7122-1-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <20231024092634.7122-19-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <56769c01-e21d-4775-94f0-ef9f863c1e92@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323329-2039173404-1699005303=:1725"
Precedence: bulk

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--8323329-2039173404-1699005303=:1725
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT

On Thu, 2 Nov 2023, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> On 10/24/2023 2:26 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> ...
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl.h b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl.h
> > index ec6efd36f60a..e017adf1390d 100644
> 
> > @@ -233,25 +183,26 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> >  		case 't':
> >  			token = strtok(optarg, ",");
> >  
> > -			mbm_test = false;
> > -			mba_test = false;
> > -			cmt_test = false;
> > -			cat_test = false;
> > +			if (!test_param_seen) {
> > +				for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(resctrl_tests); i++)
> > +					resctrl_tests[i]->disabled = true;
> > +				tests = 0;
> > +				test_param_seen = true;
> > +			}
> >  			while (token) {
> > -				if (!strncmp(token, MBM_STR, sizeof(MBM_STR))) {
> > -					mbm_test = true;
> > -					tests++;
> > -				} else if (!strncmp(token, MBA_STR, sizeof(MBA_STR))) {
> > -					mba_test = true;
> > -					tests++;
> > -				} else if (!strncmp(token, CMT_STR, sizeof(CMT_STR))) {
> > -					cmt_test = true;
> > -					tests++;
> > -				} else if (!strncmp(token, CAT_STR, sizeof(CAT_STR))) {
> > -					cat_test = true;
> > -					tests++;
> > -				} else {
> > -					printf("invalid argument\n");
> > +				bool found = false;
> > +
> > +				for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(resctrl_tests); i++) {
> > +					if (!strcasecmp(token, resctrl_tests[i]->name)) {
> > +						if (resctrl_tests[i]->disabled)
> > +							tests++;
> > +						resctrl_tests[i]->disabled = false;
> > +						found = true;
> > +					}
> > +				}
> 
> Could providing multiple "-t" result in the test count not
> matching the number of tests run?

bool test_param_seen covers the case with more than one -t parameter.
Because of it, the code above resets tests and ->disabled only when the 
first -t is encountered. tests++ is only done when ->disabled is set from 
true to false.

I don't see how they could get out of sync but if you had a more specific 
case in mind, just let me know.

-- 
 i.

--8323329-2039173404-1699005303=:1725--