[Piglit] Allow junit to be used for summary generation

[Jose Fonseca]

On 09/10/15 17:44, Mark Janes wrote:
> Jose Fonseca <jfonseca at vmware.com> writes:
>
>> On 09/10/15 01:21, baker.dylan.c at gmail.com wrote:
>>> This series updates the junit backend to allow it to properly load junit
>>> and convert it back into piglit's internal representation, thus allowing
>>> it to be summarized using the piglit summary tools
>>>
>>> There is still some work that needs to be done beyond this, most of the
>>> platform metadata isn't stored yet and restored, but I have a plan for
>>> that. I have some other refactoring work that I think will make that
>>> easier, and I'd like to get there before landing that.
>>>
>>> This is enough to be able to compare junit and json results using the
>>> console and html summaries.
>>>
>>> There is a caveat here, and that's patch 3. To compare json and junit we
>>> need to be able to restore the names of the junit tests to *exactly*
>>> what they were before, and currently we don't have a way to reverse the
>>> '.' -> '_' conversion. My proposal is to change '.' into '___', which is
>>> very unlikely in a real test name (though we could change it to almost
>>> anything that would be unique). This may break some existing setup
>>> (Mark, I think this will probably break some of our expected fail/crash
>>> data).
>>>
>>
>> I don't object this, but instead of this brittle testname (de)munge,
>> have you considered/tried using an additional XML attribute with
>> unmodified piglit test name?  I expect that Jenkins junit parser will
>> just outright ignore it.
>
> My recollection is that we found the junit parser to be strict:
>
> https://svn.jenkins-ci.org/trunk/hudson/dtkit/dtkit-format/dtkit-junit-model/src/main/resources/com/thalesgroup/dtkit/junit/model/xsd/junit-4.xsd
>
>>
>> Jose

In that case, we could try using the id attribute with the full 
qualified test-path + name, which should unique.

Jose