linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v1 0/6] kunit: create a centralized executor to dispatch all KUnit tests

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 29 Jan 2020 13:18:55 -0800
From:   Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
To:     Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
Cc:     "Bird, Timothy" <Tim.Bird@...y.com>,
        Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
        David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, rppt@...ux.ibm.com,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Knut Omang <knut.omang@...cle.com>,
        linux-um <linux-um@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 0/6] kunit: create a centralized executor to dispatch all
 KUnit tests

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 8:24 PM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/28/20 1:53 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:35 AM <Tim.Bird@...y.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From:  Frank Rowand on January 28, 2020 11:37 AM
> >>>
> >>> On 1/28/20 1:19 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 9:40 AM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
> >> ...
> >>>> we could add Kconfigs to control this, but the compiler nevertheless
> >>>> complains because it doesn't know what phase KUnit runs in.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is there any way to tell the compiler that it is okay for non __init
> >>>> code to call __init code? I would prefer not to have a duplicate
> >>>> version of all the KUnit libraries with all the symbols marked __init.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure.  The build messages have always been useful and valid in
> >>> my context, so I never thought to consider that possibility.
> >>>
> >>>> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> I'm not sure there's a restriction on non __init code calling __init
> >> code.  In init/main.c arch_call_reset_init() is in __init, and it calls
> >> rest_init which is non __init, without any special handling.
> >>
> >> Is the compiler complaint mentioned above related to  calling
> >> into __init code, or with some other issue?
> >
> > I distinctly remember having the compiler complain at me when I was
> > messing around with the device tree unit tests because of KUnit
> > calling code marked as __init. Maybe it's time to start converting
> > those to KUnit to force the issue? Frank, does that work for you?
>
> I have agreed to try converting the devicetree unittest to KUnit.
>
> Now that KUnit is in 5.5, I think there is a solid foundation for
> me to proceed.

Awesome! Last time we talked (offline), it sounded like you had a
clear idea of what you wanted to do; nevertheless, feel free to reuse
anything from my attempt at it, if you find anything useful, or
otherwise rope me in if you have any questions, comments, or
complaints.