Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] selftests/mm: Report unique test names for each cow test

[David Hildenbrand]

On 03.06.25 19:55, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 06:48:19PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 06:57:38PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
> > > I agree that printing something in case KSFT_PASS does not make sense
> > > indeed.
> > >
> > > But if something goes wrong (KSFT_FAIL/KSFT_SKIP) I would expect a reason in
> > > all cases.
> > >
> > > IIRC kselftest_harness.h behaves that way:
> >
> > That's mostly just it being chatty because it uses an assert based idiom
> > rather than explicit pass/fail reports, it's a lot less common for
> > things written directly to kselftest.h where it's for example fairly
> > common to see a result detected directly in a ksft_result() call.
> > That does tend to be quite helpful when looking at the results, you
> > don't need to dig out the logs so often.

Right, and if the test fails, you immediately know why. So I am a big 
fan of the test telling you why it failed, not assuming "it's the last 
check, so the user can go figure out that it's the last check in that 
file and we just don't tell him that".

In any case, I hoe this will be gone at some point, and 
kselftest_harness.h will provide that to us automatically.


--
Cheers,

David / dhildenb