[PATCH v5 13/18] kunit: tool: add Python wrappers for running KUnit tests

[Brendan Higgins]

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 3:03 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 01:02:55AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 5:01 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof at kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:26:08AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > > >  create mode 100644 tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-all_passed.log
> > > >  create mode 100644 tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-crash.log
> > > >  create mode 100644 tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure.log
> > > >  create mode 100644 tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-no_tests_run.log
> > > >  create mode 100644 tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_output_isolated_correctly.log
> > > >  create mode 100644 tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_read_from_file.kconfig
> > >
> > > Why are these being added upstream? The commit log does not explain
> > > this.
> >
> > Oh sorry, those are for testing purposes. I thought that was clear
> > from being in the test_data directory. I will reference it in the
> > commit log in the next revision.
>
> Still, I don't get it. They seem to be results from a prior run. Why do
> we need them for testing purposes?

Those logs are the raw output from UML with KUnit installed. They are
for testing kunit_tool, the Python scripts added in this commit. One
of the things that kunit_tool does is parses the results output by
UML, extracts the KUnit data, and presents it in a user friendly
manner.

I added these logs so I could test that kunit_tool parses certain
kinds of output correctly. For example, I want to know that it parses
a test failure correctly and includes the appropriate context. So I
have a log from a unit test that failed, and I have a test (a Python
test that is also in this commit) that tests whether kunit_tool can
parse the log correctly.

Does that make sense?