[RFC] check: Add option for report generation #62
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
As of now the tests results are generated over multiple files for each test device and each test separetly. This patch is introducing new -R option, following the idea from xfstests, so that general report could be prepared
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While the PR should work for -R text, it is just dummy, trivial example to ask for some ideas and see if there is something better we could do. And if we should even have the -R option in the first place.
So simply in the _check() I would call common/reports to create requested report for the given run, while specific single test results would be 'reported' in _call_test().
This way we would have very minimal changes to check script.
Any further logic for reports would be kept in common/reports; i.e. collecting total number of errors for xunit etc and then once I would propose xunit we would likely need one more call on check side, to know when the current run is done (so xunit report could get required tags at the end of the run).
I would appreciate some info if this would be acceptable or perhaps you would prefer to see something different?