[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v2] lib/igt_core.c: Expand --run-subtest functionality.

[Dave Gordon]

On 28/01/16 12:57, Dave Gordon wrote:
> On 28/01/16 11:05, Derek Morton wrote:
>> Added support for specifying arbitary lists of subtests to run, or
>> to exclude from being run if prefixed by ^ or !.
>>
>> subtest1,subtest2 Will run subtest1 and subtest2
>> ^subtest1,subtest2 or !subtest1,subtest2 will run all subtests except
>> subtest1 and subtest2.
>>
>> Any subtest string not starting ! or ^ and not containing a comma is
>> treated as a normal wildcard expression.
>>
>> This is required mainly on android to exclude subtests that test
>> features that do not exist in the android driver while still being able
>> to run other subtests in the binary when a wildcard expression is
>> insufficient.
>>
>> v2: Use comma as list separator (Ville Syrjala)
>> support both ^ and ! as not operators (Dave Gordon)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Derek Morton <derek.j.morton at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   lib/igt_core.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/igt_core.c b/lib/igt_core.c
>> index 6b69bb7..5d243af 100644
>> --- a/lib/igt_core.c
>> +++ b/lib/igt_core.c
>> @@ -207,7 +207,15 @@
>>    * To do that obtain the lists of subtests with "--list-subtests",
>> which can be
>>    * run as non-root and doesn't require the i915 driver to be loaded
>> (or any
>>    * intel gpu to be present). Then individual subtests can be run with
>> - * "--run-subtest". Usage help for tests with subtests can be
>> obtained with the
>> + * "--run-subtest". --run-subtest accepts wildcard characters. A list of
>> + * subtests to run may be specified by using ',' as a separator.
>> + * A prefix of ^ or ! may be added to invert the logic, e.g. run all
>> tests except...
>> + *
>> + * - --run-subtest basic* will run all subtests starting basic.
>> + * - --run-subtest subtest1,subtest2 will run only subtest1 and subtest2
>> + * - --run-subtest ^subtest1,subtest2 will run all those except
>> subtest1 and subtest2
>> + *
>> + * Usage help for tests with subtests can be obtained with the
>>    * "--help" command line option.
>>    */
>
> This is the syntax option 1 from my previous mail (but not allowing
> multiple --run-subtest options?), which I think is a bit less powerful
> and a bit less desirable because of the perhaps unexpected precedence of
> OR above NOT (^sub1,sub2 => NOT(sub1 OR sub2).
>
> Do you think the advantages of option 2 (full generality, can express
> any boolean, expected precedence of operators) would make it worth the
> extra effort?
>
> Whichever we pick now, it will be set in stone as it will be very
> inconvenient to edit every script using the feature once it's been in
> use for a while!
>
> Another idea: have you considered bash(1) extglob syntax? See the
> manpage for bash, section "Pattern Matching". It's quite powerful,
> familiar to least to script writers, and easy to try out in bash:

GNU libc has a globbing function that lets you override readdir() and 
friends so you can use it on a string or list of strings.

http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_mono/libc.html#Globbing

Perl's Text::Glob implements glob(3) style matching that can be used to 
match against text, rather than fetching names from a filesystem.

Or have a look at wildmat(3) as standardised by RFC3977, or better still 
uwildmat(3).

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3977#section-4
http://linux.die.net/man/3/uwildmat

That seems to give about the right tradeoff of complexity vs flexibility!

.Dave.