RE: [KTAP V2 PATCH v2] ktap_v2: add test metadata
"Bird, Tim" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.kernelci,org.kernel.vger.linux-doc,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kselftest |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <SA3PR13MB6372535451AF4CA69B4C00D7FD462@SA3PR13MB6372.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Rae Moar <[email protected]> > On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 8:03 AM Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On January 26, 2024 11:14:26 PM GMT+01:00, Rae Moar <[email protected]> wrote: > > > KTAP version 2 > > > # ktap_test: main > > > # ktap_arch: uml > > > 1..1 > > > KTAP version 2 > > > # ktap_test: suite_1 > > > # ktap_subsystem: example > > > # ktap_test_file: lib/test.c > > > > I think it's a mistake to mix "diagnostics" lines with semantic lines. Since the diagnostic prefix is [# ] (hash space) how about make the test > metadata lines be [#:] (hash colon). For example: > > > > > > 1..2 > > ok 1 test_1 > > #:ktap_test: test_2 > > #:ktap_speed: very_slow > > #:custom_is_flaky: true > > # format-free stuff goes here > > ok 2 test_2 > > ... > > Hello! > > I really like this idea. The reason I chose the diagnostic line format > was to make it easier for existing parsers to parse the KTAP Metadata > lines. However, if it won't be too much of an issue for current > parsers, I think this idea would be better. So I am happy to change > this in the next version if there are no complaints. I like this suggestion as well. So this response is the opposite of a complaint. -- Tim