> -----Original Message----- > From: Maxim Uvarov [mailto:maxim.uva...@linaro.org] > Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 5:05 PM > To: Mike Holmes <mike.hol...@linaro.org> > Cc: Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <petri.savolainen@nokia-bell- > labs.com>; lng-odp <lng-odp@lists.linaro.org> > Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 05/10] validation: packet: print reason for > suite init failure > > On 02/06/17 18:01, Mike Holmes wrote: > > On 6 February 2017 at 09:55, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> > wrote: > >> On 02/06/17 17:49, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of > Mike > >>>> Holmes > >>>> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 4:41 PM > >>>> To: Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> > >>>> Cc: lng-odp <lng-odp@lists.linaro.org> > >>>> Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH 05/10] validation: packet: print reason > for > >>>> suite init failure > >>>> > >>>> On 6 February 2017 at 09:34, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> > wrote: > >>>>> On 02/06/17 15:37, Petri Savolainen wrote: > >>>>>> Knowing the reason for suite init function failure helps in > >>>>>> debugging. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Petri Savolainen <petri.savolai...@linaro.org> > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> test/common_plat/validation/api/packet/packet.c | 23 > >>>> ++++++++++++++++++----- > >>>>>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/test/common_plat/validation/api/packet/packet.c > >>>> b/test/common_plat/validation/api/packet/packet.c > >>>>>> index fa5206f..e3d28f6 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/test/common_plat/validation/api/packet/packet.c > >>>>>> +++ b/test/common_plat/validation/api/packet/packet.c > >>>>>> @@ -110,8 +110,10 @@ int packet_suite_init(void) > >>>>>> uint8_t data = 0; > >>>>>> uint32_t i; > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - if (odp_pool_capability(&capa) < 0) > >>>>>> + if (odp_pool_capability(&capa) < 0) { > >>>>>> + printf("pool_capability failed\n"); > >>>> > >>>> We have defined LOG_DBG in test_debug.h, shoudl we be using that ? > >>>> > >>> > >>> All other xxx_suite_init() just use printf() or don't print at all. > This is just applying the current practice. > >>> > >>> -Petri > >>> > >>> > >> > >> LOG_ for implementation only, not for tests. > > > > That is not true currently, but happy if we delete the current cases > > or document why we pick either method. > > > > common_plat/validation/api/system/system.c: > > LOG_DBG("\nBAD VERSION=%s\n", version_string); > > common_plat/validation/api/timer/timer.c: LOG_DBG("Timer handle: > > %" PRIu64 "\n", odp_timer_to_u64(tim)); > > common_plat/validation/api/timer/timer.c: LOG_DBG("Timeout > > handle: %" PRIu64 "\n", odp_timeout_to_u64(tmo)); > > common_plat/validation/api/timer/timer.c: > > LOG_DBG("Wrong tick: expected %" PRIu64 > > common_plat/validation/api/timer/timer.c: > > LOG_DBG("Too late tick: %" PRIu64 > > common_plat/validation/api/timer/timer.c: > > LOG_DBG("Failed to allocate timeout (%" PRIu32 "/%d)\n", > > common_plat/validation/api/timer/timer.c: > > LOG_DBG("Failed to allocate timer > > .... > > > > > > I think we should be consistent, looks like there are two standards, > > some with printf > > > unbelievable LOG_ are defined in test/test_debug.h > In that case we should use them in tests. > > Maxim.
Found over 200 hits of printf() in current validation test .c files. May be someone can take an action to clean out all of those. This patch just follows the current practice of xxx_suite_init() functions. -Petri
