On Thu, 2025-08-28 at 10:09 +0200, Tomas Glozar wrote: > čt 21. 8. 2025 v 5:58 odesílatel Crystal Wood <crw...@redhat.com> napsal: > > > > Simplify the code so that we can print failures as they happen rather > > than trying to figure out what went wrong after printing "not ok". This > > also means that "not ok" gets printed after the info rather than before, > > which seems more intuitive anyway. > > > > This change is causing some formatting issues, e.g.: > > tests/hwnoise.t ... 2/6 # Output match failed: "rtla hit stop tracing" > # Error iterating on events > # Oops, error disabling tracer > # > # exit code 1 > tests/hwnoise.t ... 3/6 not ok 3 - set the automatic trace mode > > (the comment is on the same line as the previous test)
I'm not seeing the "tests/hwnoise.t ... 2/6" part. What is printing that? > Furthermore, it's standard to first print "not ok" and then the > comments, see the documentation to Test::More [1], so I think we > should keep that. > > [1] https://metacpan.org/pod/Test::More#ok https://xkcd.com/927/ :-P I'm not a Perler, so I didn't recognize it as anything standardized. Still seems backwards to me, both in terms of making it easier to see which test failed, and in terms of being a pain to implement. And we don't even get the benefit of seeing the test name printed before it runs, to make it easier to see what's taking a long time. Seems like Linux uses a variant of this, though: Documentation/dev-tools/ktap.rst I'll fix it, hopefully by sticking the error output into a variable or something rather than duplicating logic. Or should we be using some existing test infrastructure? -Crystal
