[DTrace-devel] [PATCH] test: Suppress some white space

[Eugene Loh]

On 6/13/25 10:10, Nick Alcock wrote:

> On 9 Jun 2025, eugene loh spake thusly:
>
>> From: Eugene Loh <eugene.loh at oracle.com>
>>
>> The test suite turns pointers into "{ptr}" so that results
>> comparisons will not be sensitive to particular pointer offset
>> values.
>>
>> If these offsets change in width -- say, from 0xf0 to 0x100 --
>> the amount of white space in the postprocessed output can change.
>>
>> Add additional postprocessing to a test that sometimes fails due
>> to this problem.
> Hmm... this would work for this test, but maybe we should change the
> {ptr} substitution in runtest.sh itself so that it gets this right in
> the general case?
>
> Something like
>
> diff --git a/runtest.sh b/runtest.sh
> index 156e7dec8a1c3..c5703a81bc6d4 100755
> --- a/runtest.sh
> +++ b/runtest.sh
> @@ -509,7 +509,7 @@ postprocess()
>       # TODO: may need adjustment or making optional if scripts emit hex
>       # values which are not continuously variable.
>   
> -    sed -e '/^==[0-9][0-9]*== /!s,0x[0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*,{ptr},g' \
> +    sed -e '/^==[0-9][0-9]*== /!s,0x[0-9a-f][0-9a-f]*\([ \t]*\),{ptr}\1,g' \
>   	-e 's,at BPF pc [1-9][0-9]*,at BPF pc NNN,' < $tmpdir/pp.out > $final
>   
>       return $retval
>
> might work. (Obviously the lines would no longer line up, but the number
> of spaces would remain the same as they were before the substitution.)
>
> Lots and lots of expected results would need regenerating after this,
> of course...

I agree that one can make a case for a broader change, but I'm not 
convinced that that would be the better way.  FWIW, there were these two 
commits
         6f398f229 test: Make tests more resilient to different prid widths
         72a79b784 test: Improve resilience of tests to ptr widths
that took the narrower, more tactical approach to such a problem.

I vote for the expedient route:  a "Reviewed-by" and we move on. But 
then, in this case, my vote doesn't count!