[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] test/py: Support setting up specific timeout
Large file transfers, flash erasing and more complicated tests requires more time to finish. Provide a way to setup specific timeout directly in test.
For example description for 50s test: timeout = 50000 with u_boot_console.temporary_timeout(timeout): u_boot_console.run_command(...)
Signed-off-by: Michal Simek michal.simek@xilinx.com ---
Changes in v2: - save console.p instead of simple console - Some fixes in comments - Save orig_timeout directly in class - Remove get_spawn call - Test if self.p exists
test/py/u_boot_console_base.py | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
diff --git a/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py b/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py index f7434363fbcb..dbbdd53b46dc 100644 --- a/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py +++ b/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py @@ -56,6 +56,24 @@ class ConsoleDisableCheck(object): self.console.disable_check_count[self.check_type] -= 1 self.console.eval_bad_patterns()
+class ConsoleSetupTimeout(object): + """Context manager (for Python's with statement) that temporarily sets up + timeout for specific command. This is useful when execution time is greater + then default 30s.""" + + def __init__(self, console, timeout): + self.p = console.p + self.orig_timeout = self.p.timeout + self.p.timeout = timeout + + def __enter__(self): + return self + + def __exit__(self, extype, value, traceback): + if not self.p: + return + self.p.timeout = self.orig_timeout + class ConsoleBase(object): """The interface through which test functions interact with the U-Boot console. This primarily involves executing shell commands, capturing their @@ -391,3 +409,18 @@ class ConsoleBase(object): """
return ConsoleDisableCheck(self, check_type) + + def temporary_timeout(self, timeout): + """Temporarily set up different timeout for commands. + + Create a new context manager (for use with the "with" statement) which + temporarily change timeout. + + Args: + timeout: Time in milliseconds. + + Returns: + A context manager object. + """ + + return ConsoleSetupTimeout(self, timeout)
On 05/18/2016 11:00 AM, Michal Simek wrote:
Large file transfers, flash erasing and more complicated tests requires more time to finish. Provide a way to setup specific timeout directly in test.
For example description for 50s test: timeout = 50000 with u_boot_console.temporary_timeout(timeout): u_boot_console.run_command(...)
diff --git a/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py b/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py
+class ConsoleSetupTimeout(object):
- def __init__(self, console, timeout):
self.p = console.pself.orig_timeout = self.p.timeoutself.p.timeout = timeout
- def __exit__(self, extype, value, traceback):
if not self.p:return
That test can't fail, since __init__ already used self.p in a way that would have triggered an exception during the constructor, which I believe would cause neither __enter__ nor __exit__ to ever be called since the object would not exist.
Still, this does no harm, so either way, Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren swarren@nvidia.com
On 18.5.2016 21:00, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 05/18/2016 11:00 AM, Michal Simek wrote:
Large file transfers, flash erasing and more complicated tests requires more time to finish. Provide a way to setup specific timeout directly in test.
For example description for 50s test: timeout = 50000 with u_boot_console.temporary_timeout(timeout): u_boot_console.run_command(...)
diff --git a/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py b/test/py/u_boot_console_base.py
+class ConsoleSetupTimeout(object):
- def __init__(self, console, timeout):
self.p = console.pself.orig_timeout = self.p.timeoutself.p.timeout = timeout
- def __exit__(self, extype, value, traceback):
if not self.p:returnThat test can't fail, since __init__ already used self.p in a way that would have triggered an exception during the constructor, which I believe would cause neither __enter__ nor __exit__ to ever be called since the object would not exist.
Still, this does no harm, so either way, Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren swarren@nvidia.com
I have tested it without that checking and you are right. I have sent v3 which remove this with your Reviewed-by line.
Thanks, Michal
participants (2)
-
Michal Simek -
Stephen Warren