Re: [KTAP V2 PATCH] ktap_v2: allow prefix to KTAP lines

From: Frank Rowand
Date: Sun Mar 26 2023 - 22:12:49 EST


On 3/16/23 17:59, Rae Moar wrote:
> Change the KTAP v2 spec to allow variable prefixes to KTAP lines,
> instead of fixed indentation of two spaces. However, the prefix must be
> constant on the same level of testing (besides unknown lines).
>
> This was proposed by Tim Bird in 2021 and then supported by Frank Rowand
> in 2022 (see link below).
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/bc6e9ed7-d98b-c4da-2a59-ee0915c18f10@xxxxxxxxx/

Another link to the same thread, but expanded to show all replies in one page is:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/bc6e9ed7-d98b-c4da-2a59-ee0915c18f10@xxxxxxxxx/T/#u

Near the top of that thread I proposed alternative 1 (essentially what Tim
originally suggested, and what Rae proposes here) and alternative 2 (with
slight variant 2b). The overall preference seemed to be alternative 1, but
if we wanted to provide a method to provide test or system metadata then
alternative 2 might provide both a test prefix and metadata.

Alternate 1 provides the vast majority of what I need the prefix for, but
I think there has been a recent comment that it would be useful to be able
to report system metadata (sorry, I haven't found a reference for that yet).
In my case, it would be informative to use metadata to report which config
options that impact the DT unittests are enabled.

>
> As cited in the original proposal, it is useful in some Fuego tests to
> include an identifier in the prefix. This is an example:
>
> KTAP version 1
> 1..2
> [batch_id 4] KTAP version 1
> [batch_id 4] 1..2
> [batch_id 4] ok 1 cyclictest with 1000 cycles
> [batch_id 4] # problem setting CLOCK_REALTIME
> [batch_id 4] not ok 2 cyclictest with CLOCK_REALTIME
> not ok 1 check realtime
> [batch_id 4] KTAP version 1
> [batch_id 4] 1..1
> [batch_id 4] ok 1 IOZone read/write 4k blocks
> ok 2 check I/O performance
>
> Here is a link to a version of the KUnit parser that is able to parse
> variable length prefixes for KTAP version 2. Note that the prefix must
> be constant at the same level of testing.
>
> Link: https://kunit-review.googlesource.com/c/linux/+/5710
>
> Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> This idea has already been proposed but I wanted to potentially
> restart the discussion by demonstrating this change can by
> implemented in the KUnit parser. Let me know what you think.
>
> Note: this patch is based on Frank's ktap_spec_version_2 branch.
>
> Documentation/dev-tools/ktap.rst | 21 ++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/ktap.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/ktap.rst
> index ff77f4aaa6ef..ac61fdd97096 100644
> --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/ktap.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/ktap.rst

Some additional lines of the Spec to be updated (from my alternate 1 email,
I haven't checked the current Spec to see if these are the exact changes
needed, but at least capture the intent:

The "Version lines" format is changed from:

KTAP version 1

to:

[<prefix string>] KTAP version 1

The "Plan lines" format is changed from:

"1..N"

to:

[<prefix string>] "1..N"

The "Test case result lines" format is changed from:

<result> <number> [<description>][ # [<directive>] [<diagnostic data>]]

to:

[<prefix string>] <result> <number> [<description>][ # [<directive>] [<diagnostic data>]]


<prefix content is a constant string>


I wrote (with a bit of imprecision):

Indentation for "Nested tests" follows <prefix string>. The indentation
does NOT precede <prefix string>.

which was meant to imply that the two space indentation would follow the
<prefix string>.

The patch I am replying to instead replaces the two space indentation
entirely with the <prefix string>. I think this patches' version of
indentation is superior to what I suggested.

> @@ -192,9 +192,11 @@ starting with another KTAP version line and test plan, and end with the overall
> result. If one of the subtests fail, for example, the parent test should also
> fail.
>
> -Additionally, all lines in a subtest should be indented. One level of
> -indentation is two spaces: " ". The indentation should begin at the version
> -line and should end before the parent test's result line.
> +Additionally, all lines in a subtest should be indented. The standard for one
> +level of indentation is two spaces: " ". However, any prefix for indentation
> +is allowed as long as the prefix is consistent throughout that level of
> +testing. The indentation should begin at the version line and should end
> +before the parent test's result line.
>
> "Unknown lines" are not considered to be lines in a subtest and thus are
> allowed to be either indented or not indented.

I was a little more verbose about "Unknown lines":

"Unknown lines" may optionally be prefixed with the <prefix string>, but
are not required to be prefixed with the <prefix string>. It is allowed
for some "Unknown lines" to not be prefixed with the <prefix string>, even
if one or more other "Unknown lines" are prefixed with the <prefix string>.

I think combining the intent ("not considered to be lines in a subtest") with
the extra verbosity would be useful.

> @@ -229,6 +231,19 @@ An example format with multiple levels of nested testing:
> not ok 1 example_test_1
> ok 2 example_test_2
>
> +An example of a test with two nested subtests using prefixes:
> +
> +::
> +
> + KTAP version 2
> + 1..1
> + [prefix_1] KTAP version 2
> + [prefix_1] 1..2
> + [prefix_1] ok 1 test_1
> + [prefix_1] ok 2 test_2
> + # example passed
> + ok 1 example
> +

The "[" and "]" are meant to indicate an optional field, so the
example would be:

+ KTAP version 2
+ 1..1
+ prefix_1 KTAP version 2
+ prefix_1 1..2
+ prefix_1 ok 1 test_1
+ prefix_1 ok 2 test_2
+ # example passed
+ ok 1 example
+

Of course, "[" and "]" are valid characters within the prefix string, so
that an example of "[prefix_1]" could be mentioned as a valid example.

I would suggest some additional more complex examples:

+ prefix_0 KTAP version 2
+ prefix_0 1..1
+ prefix_0 prefix_1 KTAP version 2
+ prefix_0 prefix_1 1..2
+ prefix_0 prefix_1 ok 1 test_1
+ prefix_0 prefix_1 ok 2 test_2
+ # example passed
+ prefix_0 ok 1 example
+

+ KTAP version 2
+ 1..2
+ prefix_1 KTAP version 2
+ prefix_1 1..2
+ prefix_1 ok 1 test_a_1
+ prefix_1 ok 2 test_a_2
+ # example passed
+ ok 1 example
+ prefix_2 KTAP version 2
+ prefix_2 1..2
+ prefix_2 ok 1 test_b_1
+ prefix_2 ok 2 test_b_2
+ # example passed
+ ok 2 example
+

+ KTAP version 2
+ 1..3
+ prefix_1 KTAP version 2
+ prefix_1 1..2
+ prefix_1 ok 1 test_a_1
+ prefix_1 ok 2 test_a_2
+ # example passed
+ ok 1 example
+ KTAP version 2
+ 1..2
+ ok 1 test_b_1
+ ok 2 test_b_2
+ # example passed
+ ok 2 example
+ prefix_2 KTAP version 2
+ prefix_2 1..2
+ prefix_2 ok 1 test_c_1
+ prefix_2 ok 2 test_c_2
+ # example passed
+ ok 3 example
+



>
> Major differences between TAP and KTAP
> --------------------------------------
>
> base-commit: 906f02e42adfbd5ae70d328ee71656ecb602aaf5