@@ -38,6 +38,16 @@ check-output-ignore / check-error-ignore (optional)
check-known-to-fail (optional)
Mark the test as being known to fail.
+check-output-contains: <pattern> (optional)
+ Check that the output (stdout) contains the given pattern.
+ Several such tags can be given, in which case the output
+ must contains all the patterns.
+
+check-output-excludes: <pattern> (optional)
+ Similar than the above one, but with opposite logic.
+ Check that the output (stdout) doesn't contain the given pattern.
+ Several such tags can be given, in which case the output
+ must contains none of the patterns.
Using test-suite
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@@ -48,6 +48,46 @@ get_tag()
}
##
+# helper for has_(each|none)_patterns()
+has_patterns()
+{
+ ifile="$1"
+ patt="$2"
+ ofile="$3"
+ cmp="$4"
+ grep "$patt:" "$ifile" | \
+ sed -e "s/^.*$patt: *\(.*\)$/\1/" | \
+ while read val; do
+ grep -s -q "$val" "$ofile"
+ if [ "$?" $cmp 0 ]; then
+ return 1
+ fi
+ done
+
+ return $?
+}
+
+##
+# has_each_patterns(ifile tag ofile) - does ofile contains some
+# of the patterns given by ifile's tags?
+#
+# returns 0 if all present, 1 otherwise
+has_each_patterns()
+{
+ has_patterns "$1" "$2" "$3" -ne
+}
+
+##
+# has_none_patterns(ifile tag ofile) - does ofile contains some
+# of the patterns given by ifile's tags?
+#
+# returns 1 if any present, 0 otherwise
+has_none_patterns()
+{
+ has_patterns "$1" "$2" "$3" -eq
+}
+
+##
# verbose(string) - prints string if we are in verbose mode
verbose()
{
@@ -163,6 +203,18 @@ do_test()
test_failed=1
fi
+ # verify the 'check-output-contains/excludes' tags
+ has_each_patterns "$file" 'check-output-contains' $file.output.got
+ if [ "$?" -ne "0" ]; then
+ error "Actual output doesn't contain some of the expected patterns."
+ test_failed=1
+ fi
+ has_none_patterns "$file" 'check-output-excludes' $file.output.got
+ if [ "$?" -ne "0" ]; then
+ error "Actual output contains some patterns which are not expected."
+ test_failed=1
+ fi
+
if [ "$test_failed" -eq "1" ]; then
ko_tests=`expr $ko_tests + 1`
get_tag "check-known-to-fail" $file
Currently the test suite always check the exit value and the output of the command used for the test. This is fine and allow use to catch the most common situations: - failure or crash (via the exit value) - (un)expected output (like when testing the result of the preprocessor) - (un)expected errors & warnings (like when testing sparse's warnings) But sometimes, we're not interested in the output as such because it can't be compared textually to some reference. This occurs systematically when testing the output of test-linearize or test-unssa which emits labels names which are in fact pointer values and which exact output is very sensitive to any change in processing order, optimizations, ... But useful tests can be easily made by just checking for the presence or absence of some identifiers, or more generally some patterns. This patch allow to do that by adding support for two new tags (check-output-contains & check-output-excludes), telling to test suite to verifiy that the given patterns are effectively present ot absent from the output of the tested file. Signed-off-by: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> --- Documentation/test-suite | 10 ++++++++++ validation/test-suite | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 62 insertions(+)