linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] kunit: tool: factor exec + parse steps into a function

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: <CABVgOS=E=p_2=oMpgx5_h4Jk_16X1NX-ZRp2gXC1fRXf5OAfbg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Sep 2021 12:38:39 +0800
From:   David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
To:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
Cc:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] kunit: tool: factor exec + parse steps into a function

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 6:29 AM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Currently this code is copy-pasted between the normal "run" subcommand
> and the "exec" subcommand.
>
> Given we don't have any interest in just executing the tests without
> giving the user any indication what happened (i.e. parsing the output),
> make a function that does both this things and can be reused.
>
> This will be useful when we allow more complicated ways of running
> tests, e.g. invoking the kernel multiple times instead of just once,
> etc.
>
> We remove input_data from the ParseRequest so the callers don't have to
> pass in a dummy value for this field. Named tuples are also immutable,
> so if they did pass in a dummy, exec_tests() would need to make a copy
> to call parse_tests().
>
> Removing it also makes KunitParseRequest match the other *Request types,
> as they only contain user arguments/flags, not data.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
> ---

Thanks: while I did sort of like parse_tests() being called more
explicitly, upon reflection this is much nicer.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>


-- David