linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] kunit: test: Add example_skip test suite which is always skipped

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]

Message-ID: <CAGS_qxp=EV1iy5tCs+YpxH-Pug=MDTBXo3jSc13-h7HJnzBnDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 26 May 2021 11:29:03 -0700
From:   Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc:     David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] kunit: test: Add example_skip test suite which is
 always skipped

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 1:56 AM 'Marco Elver' via KUnit Development
<kunit-dev@...glegroups.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 01:11AM -0700, David Gow wrote:
> > Add a new KUnit test suite which contains tests which are always
> > skipped. This is used as an example for how to write tests which are
> > skipped, and to demonstrate the difference between kunit_skip() and
> > kunit_mark_skipped().
> >
> > Because these tests do not pass (they're skipped), they are not enabled
> > by default, or by the KUNIT_ALL_TESTS config option: they must be
> > enabled explicitly by setting CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_SKIP_TEST=y in either
> > a .config or .kunitconfig file.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
> > ---
> >  lib/kunit/Kconfig                   | 15 +++++++++
> >  lib/kunit/Makefile                  |  2 ++
> >  lib/kunit/kunit-example-skip-test.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  3 files changed, 69 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 lib/kunit/kunit-example-skip-test.c
>
> I don't know if this test is useful for a user of KUnit. Given it's not
> testing KUnit functionality (I see you added tests that the feature
> works in patch 1/3), but rather a demonstration and therefore dead code.
> I don't think the feature is difficult to understand from the API doc
> text.
>
> Instead, would it be more helpful to add something to
> Documentation/dev-tools/kunit? Or perhaps just add something to
> lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c? It'd avoid introducing more Kconfig

I'm in favor of putting it in kunit-example-test.c as well.

But I hear there was pushback to have a non-passing test in the example?
I guess the fear is that someone will see something that doesn't say
"passed" in the example output and think something has gone wrong?

Hence this more conservative change.
But I hope that in the absence of any replies in opposition, we can
just keep one example-test.c

> options at least.
>
> Thanks,
> -- Marco
>
> --
> 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/YK4NRlyrYJ8ktsWQ%40elver.google.com.