út 2. 6. 2026 v 17:52 odesílatel John Kacur [off-list ref] napsal:

Note: Patch 1/2 is a resend of the timerlat hist tests sent previously.
Patch 2/2 adds tests for the remaining rtla commands.

Ah, this confused me. I saw cover letters, 1/2, and 2/2 with almost
the same title and content, and wondered what was going on.

Signed-off-by: John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>

John Kacur (2):
  rtla/timerlat: Add tests for option parsing with attached arguments
  rtla: Add tests for option parsing with attached arguments

 tools/tracing/rtla/tests/hwnoise.t  | 10 ++++++++++
 tools/tracing/rtla/tests/osnoise.t  | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 tools/tracing/rtla/tests/timerlat.t | 18 ++++++++++++++++++

This should be either one patch, or three patches (hwnoise, osnoise,
timerlat); especially timerlat top and timerlat hist should not be
split between two commits, as the tests are in the same file. Also,
identical tests for both top and hist should use check_top_hist or
check_top_q_hist, see commit c15c55c01e48 ("rtla/tests: Cover both top
and hist tools where possible").

Anyway, I don't think this needs runtime tests. CLI unit tests (well,
actually more like integration tests, as RTLA design doesn't have
proper isolated unit tests) in tools/tracing/rtla/tests/unit/*_cli.c
should be able to fully cover this, with the benefit of being much
faster and not requiring root or any kernel features. Do you have any
concerns that cannot be covered by unit testing?

 3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)

--
2.54.0

Tomas