On 2/27/20 7:20 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote: > Remove KUnit from init calls entirely, instead call directly from > kernel_init(). > > Co-developed-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx> > Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> > [...] > diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c > index ee4947af823f3..7875a5c486dc4 100644 > --- a/init/main.c > +++ b/init/main.c > @@ -104,6 +104,8 @@ > #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS > #include <trace/events/initcall.h> > > +#include <kunit/test.h> > + > static int kernel_init(void *); > > extern void init_IRQ(void); > @@ -1444,6 +1446,8 @@ static noinline void __init kernel_init_freeable(void) > > do_basic_setup(); > > + kunit_run_all_tests(); > + > console_on_rootfs(); > > /* I'm nervous about this happening before two key pieces of the kernel setup, which might lead to weird timing-sensitive bugs or false positives: async_synchronize_full() mark_readonly() Now, I realize kunit tests _should_ be self-contained, but this seems like a possible robustness problem. Is there any reason this can't be moved after rcu_end_inkernel_boot() in kernel_init() instead? -- Kees Cook
