Hi Alan,
Thanks for the resend.
On 1/6/20 3:28 PM, Alan Maguire wrote:
As tests are added to kunit, it will become less feasible to execute
all built tests together. By supporting modular tests we provide
a simple way to do selective execution on a running system; specifying
CONFIG_KUNIT=y
CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=m
...means we can simply "insmod example-test.ko" to run the tests.
To achieve this we need to do the following:
o export the required symbols in kunit
o string-stream tests utilize non-exported symbols so for now we skip
building them when CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=m.
o drivers/base/power/qos-test.c contains a few unexported interface
references, namely freq_qos_read_value() and freq_constraints_init().
Both of these could be potentially defined as static inline functions
in include/linux/pm_qos.h, but for now we simply avoid supporting
module build for that test suite.
o support a new way of declaring test suites. Because a module cannot
do multiple late_initcall()s, we provide a kunit_test_suites() macro
to declare multiple suites within the same module at once.
o some test module names would have been too general ("test-test"
and "example-test" for kunit tests, "inode-test" for ext4 tests);
rename these as appropriate ("kunit-test", "kunit-example-test"
and "ext4-inode-test" respectively).
Also define kunit_test_suite() via kunit_test_suites()
as callers in other trees may need the old definition.
Co-developed-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> # for ext4 bits
Acked-by: David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx> # For list-test
Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/base/power/qos-test.c | 2 +-
fs/ext4/Kconfig | 2 +-
fs/ext4/Makefile | 3 +-
fs/ext4/inode-test.c | 4 ++-
include/kunit/test.h | 37 ++++++++++++++++------
kernel/sysctl-test.c | 4 ++-
lib/Kconfig.debug | 4 +--
lib/kunit/Kconfig | 4 +--
lib/kunit/Makefile | 10 ++++--
lib/kunit/assert.c | 8 +++++
lib/kunit/{example-test.c => kunit-example-test.c} | 4 ++-
lib/kunit/{test-test.c => kunit-test.c} | 5 +--
lib/kunit/string-stream-test.c | 2 +-
lib/kunit/test.c | 8 +++++
lib/kunit/try-catch.c | 2 ++
lib/list-test.c | 4 ++-
16 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
rename lib/kunit/{example-test.c => kunit-example-test.c} (97%)
rename lib/kunit/{test-test.c => kunit-test.c} (98%)
diff --git a/drivers/base/power/qos-test.c b/drivers/base/power/qos-test.c
index 3115db0..79fc6c4 100644
--- a/drivers/base/power/qos-test.c
+++ b/drivers/base/power/qos-test.c
@@ -114,4 +114,4 @@ static void freq_qos_test_readd(struct kunit *test)
.name = "qos-kunit-test",
.test_cases = pm_qos_test_cases,
};
-kunit_test_suite(pm_qos_test_module);
+kunit_test_suites(&pm_qos_test_module);
diff --git a/fs/ext4/Kconfig b/fs/ext4/Kconfig
index ef42ab0..435510f 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/Kconfig
+++ b/fs/ext4/Kconfig
@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ config EXT4_DEBUG
echo 1 > /sys/module/ext4/parameters/mballoc_debug
config EXT4_KUNIT_TESTS
- bool "KUnit tests for ext4"
+ tristate "KUnit tests for ext4"
select EXT4_FS
depends on KUNIT
help
diff --git a/fs/ext4/Makefile b/fs/ext4/Makefile
index 840b91d..4ccb3c9 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/Makefile
+++ b/fs/ext4/Makefile
@@ -13,5 +13,6 @@ ext4-y := balloc.o bitmap.o block_validity.o dir.o ext4_jbd2.o extents.o \
ext4-$(CONFIG_EXT4_FS_POSIX_ACL) += acl.o
ext4-$(CONFIG_EXT4_FS_SECURITY) += xattr_security.o
-ext4-$(CONFIG_EXT4_KUNIT_TESTS) += inode-test.o
+ext4-inode-test-objs += inode-test.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_EXT4_KUNIT_TESTS) += ext4-inode-test.o
ext4-$(CONFIG_FS_VERITY) += verity.o
diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode-test.c b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c
index 92a9da1..95620bf 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/inode-test.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c
@@ -269,4 +269,6 @@ static void inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding(struct kunit *test)
.test_cases = ext4_inode_test_cases,
};
-kunit_test_suite(ext4_inode_test_suite);
+kunit_test_suites(&ext4_inode_test_suite);
+
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h
index dba4830..2dfb550 100644
--- a/include/kunit/test.h
+++ b/include/kunit/test.h
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
#include <kunit/assert.h>
#include <kunit/try-catch.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/types.h>
@@ -197,31 +198,47 @@ struct kunit {
int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite);
/**
- * kunit_test_suite() - used to register a &struct kunit_suite with KUnit.
+ * kunit_test_suites() - used to register one or more &struct kunit_suite
+ * with KUnit.
*
- * @suite: a statically allocated &struct kunit_suite.
+ * @suites: a statically allocated list of &struct kunit_suite.
*
- * Registers @suite with the test framework. See &struct kunit_suite for
+ * Registers @suites with the test framework. See &struct kunit_suite for
* more information.
*
- * NOTE: Currently KUnit tests are all run as late_initcalls; this means
+ * When builtin, KUnit tests are all run as late_initcalls; this means
* that they cannot test anything where tests must run at a different init
* phase. One significant restriction resulting from this is that KUnit
* cannot reliably test anything that is initialize in the late_init phase;
* another is that KUnit is useless to test things that need to be run in
* an earlier init phase.
*
+ * An alternative is to build the tests as a module. Because modules
+ * do not support multiple late_initcall()s, we need to initialize an
+ * array of suites for a module.
+ *
* TODO(brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx): Don't run all KUnit tests as
* late_initcalls. I have some future work planned to dispatch all KUnit
* tests from the same place, and at the very least to do so after
* everything else is definitely initialized.
*/
-#define kunit_test_suite(suite) \
- static int kunit_suite_init##suite(void) \
- { \
- return kunit_run_tests(&suite); \
- } \
- late_initcall(kunit_suite_init##suite)
+#define kunit_test_suites(...) \
+ static struct kunit_suite *suites[] = { __VA_ARGS__, NULL}; \
+ static int kunit_test_suites_init(void) \
+ { \
+ unsigned int i; \
+ for (i = 0; suites[i] != NULL; i++) \
+ kunit_run_tests(suites[i]); \
+ return 0; \
+ } \
+ late_initcall(kunit_test_suites_init); \
+ static void __exit kunit_test_suites_exit(void) \
+ { \
+ return; \
+ } \
+ module_exit(kunit_test_suites_exit)
+
+#define kunit_test_suite(suite) kunit_test_suites(&suite)
This macro is getting more and more complex. Is there a good reason
for this code to stay as a macro?
thanks,
-- Shuah
