[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADYN=9Jdwd=3Rh=wyzO7eOxtyTSm+JqjF385iQjfMocpz1A3YA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 12:33:38 +0200
From: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
To: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.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>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] kunit: Kconfig: enable a KUNIT_RUN_ALL fragment
Hi David,
Thank you for the review.
On Wed, 6 May 2020 at 07:08, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 6:27 PM Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > Make it easier to enable all KUnit fragments. This is needed for kernel
> > test-systems, so its easy to get all KUnit tests enabled and if new gets
> > added they will be enabled as well. Fragments that has to be builtin
> > will be missed if CONFIG_KUNIT_RUN_ALL is set as a module.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
> > ---
> > lib/kunit/Kconfig | 6 ++++++
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/kunit/Kconfig b/lib/kunit/Kconfig
> > index 95d12e3d6d95..537f37bc8400 100644
> > --- a/lib/kunit/Kconfig
> > +++ b/lib/kunit/Kconfig
> > @@ -41,4 +41,10 @@ config KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST
> > is intended for curious hackers who would like to understand how to
> > use KUnit for kernel development.
> >
> > +config KUNIT_RUN_ALL
> > + tristate "KUnit run all test"
>
> I'm not 100% sure about this name and description. It only actually
> "runs" the tests if they're builtin (as modules, they'll only run when
> loaded).
>
> Would KUNIT_BUILD_ALL or KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
I would like to go with KUNIT_ALL_TESTS if no one objects.
> or similar be better?
>
> It also, as mentioned, only really runs all available (i.e., with
> dependencies met in the current .config) tests (as distinct from the
> --alltests flag to kunit.py, which builds UML with allyesconfig), it
> might be good to add this to the description or help.
>
> Something like "Enable all KUnit tests" or "Enable all available KUnit
> tests" (or even something about "all KUnit tests with satisfied
> dependencies") might be clearer.
I like "All KUnit tests with satisfied dependencies".
>
> > + help
> > + Enables all KUnit tests, if they can be enabled.
> > + That depends on if KUnit is enabled as a module or builtin.
> > +
> I like the first line here, but the second one could use a bit more
> explanation. Maybe copy some of the boilerplate text from other tests,
> e.g.:
>
> KUnit tests run during boot and output the results to the debug log
> in TAP format (http://testanything.org/). Only useful for kernel devs
> running the KUnit test harness, and not intended for inclusion into a
> production build.
>
> For more information on KUnit and unit tests in general please refer
> to the KUnit documentation in Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/.
>
> If unsure, say N.
Makes much more sense, thanks.
>
> > endif # KUNIT
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >
>
> Otherwise, this is looking good. I've done some quick testing, and it
> all seems to work for me. As long as it's clear what the difference
> between this and other ways of running "all tests" (like the
> --alltests kunit.py option),
Do you think it should be made clearer in some way?
> I'm all for including this in.
>
Cheers,
Anders
Powered by blists - more mailing lists