[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878r6icenj.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 12:15:28 +0100
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
To: Marco Pagani <marpagan@...hat.com>,
Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>,
David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Rae Moar <rmoar@...gle.com>,
Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Marco Pagani <marpagan@...hat.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kunit: run test suites only after module
initialization completes
Marco Pagani <marpagan@...hat.com> writes:
Hello Marco,
[...]
> @@ -737,12 +738,14 @@ static void kunit_module_exit(struct module *mod)
> };
> const char *action = kunit_action();
>
> + if (!suite_set.start || !virt_addr_valid(suite_set.start))
> + return;
> +
I would add a comment here explaining why this condition is checked and
what it means. Maybe something like the following ?
+ /*
+ * Check if the kunit test suite start address is a virtual
+ * address or a direct mapping address. This is used as an
+ * indication of whether the kunit_filter_suites() was used
+ * to filter the kunit test suite or not.
+ *
+ * If is not a virtual address, then this means that the
+ * kunit_module_init() function was not called and the kunit
+ * suite was not filtered. Let's just bail out in that case.
+ */
+ if (!suite_set.start || !virt_addr_valid(suite_set.start))
+ return;
The patch makes sense to me though and agree that is a better approach.
Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
--
Best regards,
Javier Martinez Canillas
Core Platforms
Red Hat
Powered by blists - more mailing lists