[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191008210022.GA186342@google.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 14:00:22 -0700
From: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
To: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
mcgrof@...nel.org, keescook@...omium.org, yzaikin@...gle.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com,
catalin.marinas@....com, joe.lawrence@...hat.com,
penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp, schowdary@...dia.com,
urezki@...il.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
changbin.du@...el.com, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 linux-kselftest-test 0/3] kunit: support building
core/tests as modules
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 03:55:43PM +0100, Alan Maguire wrote:
> The current kunit execution model is to provide base kunit functionality
> and tests built-in to the kernel. The aim of this series is to allow
> building kunit itself and tests as modules. This in turn allows a
Cool! I had plans for supporting this eventually, so I am more than
happy to accept support for this!
> simple form of selective execution; load the module you wish to test.
> In doing so, kunit itself (if also built as a module) will be loaded as
> an implicit dependency.
Seems like a reasonable initial approach. I had some plans for a
centralized test executor, but I don't think that this should be a
problem.
> Because this requires a core API modification - if a module delivers
> multiple suites, they must be declared with the kunit_test_suites()
> macro - we're proposing this patch as a candidate to be applied to the
> test tree before too many kunit consumers appear. We attempt to deal
> with existing consumers in patch 1.
Makese sense.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists