On 09/21/2018 09:39 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 09/20/2018 11:50 PM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
On 09/21/2018 12:55 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
From: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com>
After a test has failed, test/py drains the U-Boot console log to ensure
that any relevant output is captured. At this point, we don't care about
detecting any additional errors, since the test is already known to have
failed, and U-Boot will be restarted. To ensure that the test cleanup
code
is not interrupted, and can correctly terminate the log sections for the
failed test, ignore any exception that occurs while reading the U-Boot
console output during this limited period of time.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com>
---
v2:
* Combine the two except cases into one, since one was a superset of the
other.
* Fix TAB-vs-spaces issue in identation.
---
test/py/u_boot_console_base.py | 12 +++++++++++-
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py
b/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py
index a14bad6e8c50..326b2ac51fbf 100644
--- a/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py
+++ b/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py
@@ -304,7 +304,17 @@ class ConsoleBase(object):
# Wait for something U-Boot will likely never send.
This will
# cause the console output to be read and logged.
self.p.expect(['This should never match U-Boot output'])
- except u_boot_spawn.Timeout:
+ except:
+ # We expect a timeout, since U-Boot won't print what we
waited
+ # for. Squash it when it happens.
+ #
+ # Squash any other exception too. This function is only
used to
+ # drain (and log) the U-Boot console output after a
failed test.
+ # The U-Boot process will be restarted, or target board
reset, once
+ # this function returns. So, we don't care about
detecting any
+ # additional errors, so they're squashed so that the
rest of the
+ # post-test-failure cleanup code can continue operation,
and
+ # correctly terminate any log sections, etc.
pass
finally:
self.p.timeout = orig_timeout
This patch only covers this single usage of the expect(). Expect() is
called from many test cases directly. In all these cases we still will
not catch OSErrror if the U-Boot binary terminates breaking the pipes.
That is deliberate since this approach is correct.
That is why in my patch I put the except statement into the except()
method itself.
What problem do you see in catching the exception where it is arising?
Because it ignores the exception. The correct approach is to propagate
the exception, fail the test, and then clean up. Ignoring the exception
and returning nothing from the expect logic may or may not actually lead
to detecting the error, depending on how the individual test code ends
up checking the result from the expect call. Many tests don't, because
they know that if an error occurs, and exception will be thrown through
the test code and fail it without the test code having to explicitly
check for errors.
Tom, do you plan to apply this patch? Thanks.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
