[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFd5g44OO7Lany3U9dn-Axbsf2YBQ4fynvRpkqYYf-N1AhNMQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 14:56:47 -0800
From: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, rppt@...ux.ibm.com,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@...gle.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
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>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 6/7] kunit: Add 'kunit_shutdown' option
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 10:33 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Quoting Brendan Higgins (2020-01-27 23:20:01)
> > From: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
> >
> > Add a new kernel command-line option, 'kunit_shutdown', which allows the
> > user to specify that the kernel poweroff, halt, or reboot after
> > completing all KUnit tests; this is very handy for running KUnit tests
> > on UML or a VM so that the UML/VM process exits cleanly immediately
> > after running all tests without needing a special initramfs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
> > ---
>
> Two nitpicks below
>
> Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
>
> > diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c
> > index 7fd16feff157e..d3ec1265a72fd 100644
> > --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c
> > +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c
> > @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> >
> > #include <kunit/test.h>
> > +#include <linux/reboot.h>
>
> Should this include come before kunit/test.h? I imagine the order of
> includes would be linux, kunit, local?
I think some reviewers/maintainers want them all to be alphabetical.
So I have probably done it both ways in the past. Will fix.
> >
> > /*
> > * These symbols point to the .kunit_test_suites section and are defined in
> > @@ -11,6 +12,23 @@ extern struct kunit_suite * const * const __kunit_suites_end[];
> >
> > #if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_KUNIT)
> >
> > +static char *kunit_shutdown;
> > +core_param(kunit_shutdown, kunit_shutdown, charp, 0644);
> > +
> > +static void kunit_handle_shutdown(void)
> > +{
> > + if (!kunit_shutdown)
> > + return;
> > +
> > + if (!strcmp(kunit_shutdown, "poweroff")) {
> > + kernel_power_off();
> > + } else if (!strcmp(kunit_shutdown, "halt")) {
> > + kernel_halt();
> > + } else if (!strcmp(kunit_shutdown, "reboot")) {
> > + kernel_restart(NULL);
> > + }
>
> Kernel style would be to not have braces on single line if statements.
Whoops. Sometimes I forget :-)
> > +}
> > +
> > static void kunit_print_tap_header(void)
> > {
> > struct kunit_suite * const * const *suites, * const *subsuite;
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists