[PATCH v5 10/14] efi_loader: Disable ANSI output for tests

[Tom Rini]

On Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 05:54:36AM +0200, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> On Mon, 16 Sept 2024 at 18:33, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 05:42:12PM +0200, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > Hi Heinrich,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 12 Sept 2024 at 08:58, Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk at gmx.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 02.09.24 03:18, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > We don't want ANSI characters written in tests since it is a pain to
> > > > > check the output with ut_assert_nextline() et al.
> > > > >
> > > > > Provide a way to tests to request that ANSI characters not be sent.
> > > > >
> > > > > Add a proper function comment while we are here, to encourage others.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This patch was already NAKed in the last version.
> > > >
> > > > Please, adjust the test framework if you need filtering.
> > >
> > > In what way should it be adjusted? I hope you are not suggesting that
> > > sandbox should try to filter out ANSI characters in its assertions?
> >
> > Well, perhaps the pytest framework should be filtering it out? And
> > again and to be clear, I can't reliably run these tests on _hardware_
> > because of the ANSI characters tripping things up, this is not a
> > "sandbox" problem.
> 
> Honestly, this approach (creating a problem and then dealing with it
> downstream) is just not the way things should be.

I don't follow, sorry.

> As an alternative, I can send a patch to remove the code which blindly
> sends commands to a terminal which may or may not be there. That would
> be more correct than what we have today. We can then discuss how to
> add ANSI back, with due thought to its downstream impact.

I admit I only get as far as "Oh, selftest failed and look at all that
escape sequence and such in the log" which I take as pytest choked on
the output. Maybe we have different issues?

> It's not great that  this discussion is still happening on a v5 patch.
> There has been plenty of opportunity to provide an alternative option.
> I doubt any exists.

Well, it's _also_ true that people have been providing feedback earlier
in the series and requesting changes and I don't know if it's missed
because you were dropped from the list again or buried in your inbox or
what. But you repost and don't drop / change patches that there's not
yet agreement on.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20240917/4a1c0cb6/attachment.sig>