On 10/21/20 8:43 PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 04:07:15PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: >>> I'm don't particularly care how this gets achieved, but please think >>> about how to make it easy for a kernel developer to run a specific set >>> of subsystem unit tests. (In fact, being able to do something like >>> "kunit.py run fs/ext4 fs/jbd2" or maybe "kunit.py run fs/..." would be >>> *great*. No need to fuss with hand editing the .kunitconfig file at >>> all would be **wonderful**. >> >> I understand the wish for ease of use, but this is still the tail >> wagging the dog. >> >> The primary documentation for 'select' is >> Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.rst, which says: >> >> Note: >> select should be used with care. select will force >> a symbol to a value without visiting the dependencies. >> By abusing select you are able to select a symbol FOO even >> if FOO depends on BAR that is not set. >> In general use select only for non-visible symbols >> (no prompts anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies. >> That will limit the usefulness but on the other hand avoid >> the illegal configurations all over. >> > > Well, the KUNIT configs are kinda of a special case, since normally > they don't have a lot of huge number of dependencies, since unit tests > in general are not integration tests. So ideally, dependencies will > mostly be replaced with mocking functions. And if there are *real* > dependencies that the Kunit Unit tests need, they can be explicitly > pulled in with selects. > > That being said, as I said, I'm not picky about *how* this gets > achieved. But ease of use is a key part of making people more likely > to run the unit tests. So another way of solving the problem might be > to put some kind of automated dependency solver into kunit.py, or some > way of manually adding the necessary dependencies in some kind of > Kunitconfig file that are in directories where their are Unit tests, > or maybe some kind of extenstion to the Kconfig file. My main > requirement is that the only thing that should be necessary for > enabling the ext4 Kunit tests should be adding a single line to the > .kunitconfig file. It's not fair to make the human developer manually > have to figure out the dependency chains. > > As far as I'm concerned, ease of use is important enough to justfy > special casing and/or bending the rules as far as "select" is concered > for Kunit-related CONFIG items. But if someone else want to suggest a > better approach, I'm all ears. > > Cheers, Indeed. For the record, I support testing and have for a long time. I just don't care for this big fscking hammer approach. But I doubt that I can change your mind. g'day. -- ~Randy
