linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] Add KUnit tests for llist

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <bcd02805-5262-4d44-9528-64c63a55e8b6@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 19:27:16 -0300
From: Artur Alves Cavalcante de Barros <arturacb@...il.com>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>, David Gow
 <davidgow@...gle.com>, Rae Moar <rmoar@...gle.com>,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com
Cc: n@...aprado.net, andrealmeid@...eup.net, vinicius@...elet.com,
 diego.daniel.professional@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/1] Add KUnit tests for llist

On 9/19/24 1:01 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 9/16/24 18:51, Artur Alves wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This is part of a hackathon organized by LKCAMP[1], focused on writing
>> tests using KUnit. We reached out a while ago asking for advice on what
>> would be a useful contribution[2] and ended up choosing data structures
>> that did not yet have tests.
>>
>> This patch adds tests for the llist data structure, defined in
>> include/linux/llist.h, and is inspired by the KUnit tests for the doubly
>> linked list in lib/list-test.c[3].
>>
>> It is important to note that this patch depends on the patch referenced
>> in [4], as it utilizes the newly created lib/tests/ subdirectory.
>>
>> [1] https://lkcamp.dev/about/
>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zktnt7rjKryTh9-N@arch/
>> [3] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/lib/list-test.c
>> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240720181025.work.002-kees@kernel.org/
>>
>> ---
>> Changes in v3:
>>      - Resolved checkpatch warnings:
>>          - Renamed tests for macros starting with 'for_each'
> 
> Shouldn't this a separate patch to make it easy to review?
> 
>>          - Removed link from commit message
>>      - Replaced hardcoded constants with ENTRIES_SIZE
> 
> Shouldn't this a separate patch to make it easy to review?
> 
>>      - Updated initialization of llist_node array
>>      - Fixed typos
>>      - Update Kconfig.debug message for llist_kunit
> 
> Are these changes to existing code or warnings on your added code?
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>>      - Add MODULE_DESCRIPTION()
>>      - Move the tests from lib/llist_kunit.c to lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
>>      - Change the license from "GPL v2" to "GPL"
>>
>> Artur Alves (1):
>>    lib/llist_kunit.c: add KUnit tests for llist
>>
>>   lib/Kconfig.debug       |  11 ++
>>   lib/tests/Makefile      |   1 +
>>   lib/tests/llist_kunit.c | 358 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   3 files changed, 370 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 lib/tests/llist_kunit.c
>>
> 
> You are combining lot of changes in one single patch. Each change as a 
> separate
> patch will help reviewers.
> 
> Adding new test should be a separate patch.
> 
> - renaming as a separate patch
> 
> thanks,
> -- Shuah

Hi, thanks for the reply!

I'm not sure if I understood your concerns ...

In this patch, I'm adding the entire test suite for the lock-less list 
data structure, which is the primary reason for its larger size. The 
changes in V2 and V3 were made in response to code review suggestions 
from previous iterations.

However, as a big patch I see how this cause an annoyance to review. I'm 
open to any suggestions on how I can reduce its size or make the review 
process more manageable.

Best regards,
- Artur