On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 2:51 AM Knut Omang <knut.omang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 10:23 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 08:09:15AM +0200, Knut Omang wrote: > > > and in the making:: > > > > > > kunit/ (kernel only (UML)) > > > > You are going to have to integrate this with kunit, to come up with a > > superset of both in the end. > > Yes, I agree - getting to a unified approach has been my intention since I first brought this > up at LPC'17. > > > And I do not think that kunit is only UML, it's just that seems to be > > what Brendan tests with, but should work with other arches as well. > > If I get Brendan right, it is UML only now but can be extended to also support > kernels running on real hardware. Still it is kernel only, while KTF also has the > hybrid mode, where a test can have code and assertions both in user mode and kernel mode. > This is made easier and more streamlined by letting all reporting happen from user mode. Nope, the KUnit patchset currently under review *does* support any architecture; we have tested it on x86, ARM, and UML, but it should work on any architecture. I added support for that a while ago due to popular demand.
