On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 07:58:16PM +0100, Michal Wajdeczko wrote: > On 02.11.2023 18:43, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 04:34:55PM +0100, Michal Wajdeczko wrote: > >> New functionality of the IDA (contiguous IDs allocations) requires > >> some validation coverage. Add KUnit tests for simple scenarios: > >> - counting single ID at different locations > >> - counting different sets of IDs > >> - ID allocation start at requested position > >> - different contiguous ID allocations are supported > >> > >> More advanced tests for subtle corner cases may come later. > > > > Why are you using kunit instead of extending the existing test-cases? > > I just assumed (maybe wrong) that kunit is preferred these days as some > other components are even converting their existing test code to kunit. > > But also I might be biased as I was working recently with kunit and just > found it helpful in fast test development. Note that to run these new > IDA tests, anyone who cares just need a single command line: > > $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run "ida.*" > > But if you feel that having two places with IDA tests is wrong, we can > still convert old tests to kunit (either as follow up or prerequisite) > to this patch (well, already did that locally when started working on > these improvements) Why would using kunit be superior to the existing test suite?
