On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 4:31 AM Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 1:35 AM Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Make it easier to enable all KUnit fragments. This is needed for kernel > > test-systems, so its easy to get all KUnit tests enabled and if new gets > > added they will be enabled as well. Fragments that has to be builtin > > will be missed if CONFIG_KUNIT_RUN_ALL is set as a module. > > > > Adding 'if !KUNIT_RUN_ALL' so individual test can be turned of if > > someone wants that even though KUNIT_RUN_ALL is enabled. > > I would LOVE IT, if you could make this work! I have been trying to > figure out the best way to run all KUnit tests for a long time now. > > That being said, I am a bit skeptical that this approach will be much > more successful than just using allyesconfig. Either way, there are > tests coming down the pipeline that are incompatible with each other > (the KASAN test and the KCSAN test will be incompatible). Even so, > tests like the apparmor test require a lot of non-default > configuration to compile. In the end, I am not sure how many tests we > will really be able to turn on this way. > > Thoughts? I think there's still some value in this which the allyesconfig option doesn't provide. As you point out, it's not possible to have a generic "run all tests" option due to potential conflicting dependencies, but this does provide a way to run all tests for things enabled in the current config. This could be really useful for downstream developers who want a way of running all tests relevant to their config without the overhead of running irrelevant tests (e.g., for drivers they don't build). Using allyesconfig doesn't make that distinction. Ultimately, we'll probably still want something which enables a broader set of tests for upstream development: whether that's based on this, allyesconfig, or something else entirely remains to be seen, I think. I suspect we're going to end up with something subsystem-specific (having a kunitconfig per subsystem, or a testing line in MAINTAINERS or similar are ideas which have been brought up in the past). This is a great looking tool to have in the toolbox, though. -- David
