[feat] Log also results from sanity-only tests through the perflog handlers

[ekouts]

Fixes #3460 .

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.25%. Comparing base (6faf9c7) to head (95f26be).
⚠️ Report is 11 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #3516   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    91.25%   91.25%           
========================================
  Files           62       62           
  Lines        13534    13534           
========================================
  Hits         12350    12350           
  Misses        1184     1184           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[vkarak]

lI think it should be even simpler. Since log_performance() is already called in sanity failures for performance tests, what if we simply rename it to log_result() and remove the check is_performance_check() from the log_performance()?

I think this should pretty much get us to what we want.

[ekouts]

lI think it should be even simpler. Since log_performance() is already called in sanity failures for performance tests, what if we simply rename it to log_result() and remove the check is_performance_check() from the log_performance()?

I think this should pretty much get us to what we want.

But could it be an issue for users if we add more entries in their logging, without giving the option to disable? For CSCS it's of course fine, but I added the option so that we keep compatibility.

[vkarak]

lI think it should be even simpler. Since log_performance() is already called in sanity failures for performance tests, what if we simply rename it to log_result() and remove the check is_performance_check() from the log_performance()?
I think this should pretty much get us to what we want.

But could it be an issue for users if we add more entries in their logging, without giving the option to disable? For CSCS it's of course fine, but I added the option so that we keep compatibility.

I don't it's such a big issue as it is not breaking anything. Besides, the perflogs are per test, so there will not be new entries in existing files. So I'd rather go with this change than adding yet another configuration parameter.

[ekouts]

lI think it should be even simpler. Since log_performance() is already called in sanity failures for performance tests, what if we simply rename it to log_result() and remove the check is_performance_check() from the log_performance()?
I think this should pretty much get us to what we want.

But could it be an issue for users if we add more entries in their logging, without giving the option to disable? For CSCS it's of course fine, but I added the option so that we keep compatibility.

I don't it's such a big issue as it is not breaking anything. Besides, the perflogs are per test, so there will not be new entries in existing files. So I'd rather go with this change than adding yet another configuration parameter.

Ok! will make the change :)

[vkarak]

Lgtm, just a couple of minor comments.