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]

Date:   Wed, 26 May 2021 10:56:38 +0200
From:   Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To:     David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
        kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        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 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
options at least.

Thanks,
-- Marco