linux-kernel - Re: Converting kselftest test modules to kunit

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: <8412a936-b202-4313-b5b4-ce6e72a3392f@collabora.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 13:11:14 +0500
From: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>
To: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Cc: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@...labora.com>,
 Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, davidgow@...gle.com,
 "open list : KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
 open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
 "kernel@...labora.com" <kernel@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: Converting kselftest test modules to kunit

On 7/15/24 9:40 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 03:09:24PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>> Hi Kees and All,
>>
>> There are several tests in kselftest subsystem which load modules to tests
>> the internals of the kernel. Most of these test modules are just loaded by
>> the kselftest, their status isn't read and reported to the user logs. Hence
>> they don't provide benefit of executing those tests.
>>
>> I've found patches from Kees where he has been converting such kselftests
>> to kunit tests [1]. The probable motivation is to move tests output of
>> kselftest subsystem which only triggers tests without correctly reporting
>> the results. On the other hand, kunit is there to test the kernel's
>> internal functions which can't be done by userspace.
>>
>> Kselftest:	Test user facing APIs from userspace
>> Kunit:		Test kernel's internal functions from kernelspace
> 
> I would say this is a reasonable guide to how these things should
> be separated, yes. That said, much of what was kind of ad-hoc kernel
> internals testing that was triggered via kselftests is better done via
> KUnit these days, but not everything.
I started investigated when I found that kselftest doesn't parse the kernel
logs to mark these tests pass/fail. (kselftest/lib is good example of it)

> 
>> This brings me to conclusion that kselftest which are loading modules to
>> test kernelspace should be converted to kunit tests. I've noted several
>> such kselftests.
> 
> I would tend to agree, yes. Which stand out to you? I've mainly been
> doing the conversions when I find myself wanting to add new tests, etc.
lib
	test_bitmap
	prime_numbers
	test_printf
	test_scanf
	test_strscpy (already converted, need to remove this test)
lock
	test-ww_mutex module
net
	test_blackhole_dev
user
	test_user_copy (probably already converted, need to remove this test)
firmware
	test_firmware
fpu
	test_fpu

Most of these modules are found in lib/*.

Would it be desired to move these to kunit?

-- 
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum