On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 01:56:01PM +0200, Jan Tluka wrote:
Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:28:04AM CEST, olichtne(a)redhat.com wrote:
>From: Ondrej Lichtner <olichtne(a)redhat.com>
>
>Previously no information (or just a reference to the flow object) was
>provided during the report_and_evaluate parts of the Perf recipe code.
>
>Now that the Flow object has an acceptable implementation of a __repr__
>method we can safely add flow descriptions where relevant.
>
>Signed-off-by: Ondrej Lichtner <olichtne(a)redhat.com>
>---
> .../Perf/Evaluators/BaselineFlowAverageEvaluator.py | 3 ++-
> lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Evaluators/NonzeroFlowEvaluator.py | 5 ++++-
> lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Measurements/BaseFlowMeasurement.py | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Evaluators/BaselineFlowAverageEvaluator.py
b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Evaluators/BaselineFlowAverageEvaluator.py
>index 72d0a73..bcaf466 100644
>--- a/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Evaluators/BaselineFlowAverageEvaluator.py
>+++ b/lnst/RecipeCommon/Perf/Evaluators/BaselineFlowAverageEvaluator.py
>@@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ def __init__(self, pass_difference):
> def describe_group_results(self, recipe, results):
> result = results[0]
> return [
>- "Flow {} Baseline average evaluation".format(result.flow),
>+ "Baseline average evaluation of flow",
Just a minor issue, could you add a colon after 'flow'? The same that you do
for printing non-zero evaluator, to make both consistent?
J.
Will do.
-Ondrej