[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3929a023-eb7a-509c-50e1-ee72dca05191@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 16:41:47 -0600
From: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: corbet@....net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, shuah@...nel.org,
rafael@...nel.org, johannes@...solutions.net, lenb@...nel.org,
james.morse@....com, tony.luck@...el.com, bp@...en8.de,
arve@...roid.com, tkjos@...roid.com, maco@...roid.com,
joel@...lfernandes.org, christian@...uner.io, hridya@...gle.com,
surenb@...gle.com, minyard@....org, arnd@...db.de,
mchehab@...nel.org, rric@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] Introduce Simple atomic and non-atomic counters
On 9/26/20 10:29 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> 7. Verified that the test module compiles in kunit env. and test
>> module can be loaded to run the test.
>
> I meant write it using KUnit interfaces (e.g. KUNIT_EXPECT*(),
> kunit_test_suite(), etc):
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kunit/
>
> Though I see the docs are still not updated[1] to reflect the Kconfig
> (CONFIG_foo_KUNIT_TEST) and file naming conventions (foo_kunit.c).
>
I would like to be able to run this test outside Kunit env., hence the
choice to go with a module and kselftest script. It makes it easier to
test as part of my workflow as opposed to doing a kunit and build and
running it that way.
I don't mind adding TEST_COUNTERS to kunit default configs though.
thanks,
-- Shuah
Powered by blists - more mailing lists