<html><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><font size="4">Hi!</font></p>
<p><font size="4">I also think that support for an array of
functions is needed to cover all scenarios and cleanup the code
a little bit. The real problem with tcases is that sometimes we
are doing what we might do with multiple functions, but using an
approach which is expecting struct and some sort of "filtering"
in .test_all function.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="4">And in some cases, where one particular testcase
differs by a statement from an another, struct needs a flag to
filter out the specific testcase. This would be easy to handle
with two different functions.</font></p>
<p><font size="4">Also the output message sometimes is stored into
the struct, in order to show the correct TPASS/TFAIL message we
need, according with the tcase. And this is probably an
overengineering solution, since that would be handled well using
multiple testcases functions, testing different scenarios and
using different output messages.</font></p>
<p><font size="4">Also simple tests, such as input arguments unit
tests, would benefit from array of tests functions, since we can
split tcases into multiple functions and make code more
readable.<br>
</font></p>
<p>To sum up things, I think that having support for an array of
test functions can cleanup code in many tests and make them easier
to read/maintain. tcases can still do well sometimes, but adding
the support for an array of functions can improve the LTP
framework and so the way we are testing the kernel.<br>
</p>
<p>Andrea<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/7/22 12:55, Petr Vorel wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:YgEIviW5%2FHrW4yja@pevik">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Hi all,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Hi!
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">+static void run(unsigned int i)
+{
+ tcases[i].tfunc();
+}
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">OT: we may lack something in the API, when function like this need to be
defined.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">See:
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2017-October/005829.html">https://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2017-October/005829.html</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2017-July/005132.html">https://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2017-July/005132.html</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/860483630.25581747.1507017497043.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com/">https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/860483630.25581747.1507017497043.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com/</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/20170727081437.27995-1-chrubis@suse.cz/">https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/20170727081437.27995-1-chrubis@suse.cz/</a>
Very nice that you remember your old work :) (we didn't have patchwork back then).
Now I remember it - you already implemented it in 5 years old RFC, Jan didn't
see a value and that's why it haven't been merged.
Yes, Jan is right that it complicates code a bit, but even if you replace this
code:
statx09.c
static struct test_cases {
void (*tfunc)(void);
} tcases[] = {
{&test_flagged},
{&test_unflagged},
};
static void run(unsigned int i)
{
tcases[i].tfunc();
}
with .test_all where you have the switch it still kind of boilerplate. Thus I
agree with cyrils argument:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/20171003125958.GB11692@rei/">https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/20171003125958.GB11692@rei/</a>
"aiming to avoid the need to have a switch () in each testcase that
implements a similar tests but cannot be easily data driven (as we do
for most of tests that loop over an array of structures describing the
test data)"
Thus, not sure if we want to rething the implementation, but I'd be for adding
the support (sure doc and docparse adoption would need to be added but that's
obvious).
Kind regards,
Petr
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>