linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kunit: arch/um/configs: Enable KUNIT_ALL

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:   Tue, 18 May 2021 13:14:11 -0700
From:   Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
To:     David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, linux-um@...ts.infradead.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kunit: arch/um/configs: Enable KUNIT_ALL_TESTS by default

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:58 PM 'David Gow' via KUnit Development
<kunit-dev@...glegroups.com> wrote:
>
> Make the default .kunitconfig (specified in
> arch/um/configs/kunit_defconfig) specify CONFIG_KUNIT_ALL_TESTS by
> default. KUNIT_ALL_TESTS runs all tests which have satisfied
> dependencies in the current .config (which would be the architecture
> defconfig).
>
> Currently, the default .kunitconfig enables only the example tests and
> KUnit's own tests. While this does provide a good example of what a
> .kunitconfig for running a few individual tests should look like, it
> does mean that kunit_tool runs a pretty paltry collection of tests by
> default.

>From the perspective of someone trying out KUnit for the first time,
I'd personally
* try out `kunit.py run`
* then maybe grep for a test/suite name that sounds interesting.

So I'm strongly in favor of the default running a wider variety of tests.
The build and execution time is still very quick, so no complaints there.

I also think this makes the set of (most of) the existing tests more
discoverable then grepping around for #include <kunit/test.h> or
similar indicators.

But I'm also biased in that I like seeing larger numbers of tests.

>
> A default run of ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run now runs 70 tests
> instead of 14.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>

Acked-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>

> ---
>  arch/um/configs/kunit_defconfig | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/um/configs/kunit_defconfig b/arch/um/configs/kunit_defconfig
> index 9235b7d42d38..becf3432a375 100644
> --- a/arch/um/configs/kunit_defconfig
> +++ b/arch/um/configs/kunit_defconfig
> @@ -1,3 +1,2 @@
>  CONFIG_KUNIT=y
> -CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=y
> -CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=y

I think it's maybe still useful to have an example of selecting a specific test.
I'd lean towards keeping one or both of these.

KUNIT_TEST might not be as clear as KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST, so I'd lean
towards keeping that one, if we don't want both.


> +CONFIG_KUNIT_ALL_TESTS=y
> --
> 2.31.1.751.gd2f1c929bd-goog
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@...glegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20210518035825.1885357-1-davidgow%40google.com.