Hi Daniel, Às 03:48 de 07/07/21, Daniel Latypov escreveu: > On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 1:41 PM André Almeida <andrealmeid@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> We belong to two student groups, FLUSP [1] and LKCAMP [2], both of which >> are focused on sharing kernel and free software development knowledge >> and experience with fellow free software developers and newcomers. >> >> As part of our efforts, we'll be organizing a KUnit hackathon in the >> next Saturday (July 10), where we intend to help newcomers convert >> existing runtime tests (the ones found at lib/) to KUnit and maybe >> create new ones. Depending on the number of attendees, a high volume of >> patches may be sent throughout the day. We will do our best to review >> all patches before they go to the kernel mailing lists hoping to avoid >> wasting your time with minor patching issues. > > That sounds great! > :) >> >> So we wanted to let you know of all this beforehand and give you the >> time to send any suggestions or comments on all this. For instance, we > > Some random, unorganized thoughts: > * I (as a kernel newbie) found the ownership of tests under lib/ to be > a bit unclear. > Indeed, but we found that tests under lib/ are the easiest ones to convert, given that they deal with more "generic" programming aspects, like linked lists and sort, and doesn't requires subsystem specific knowledge. > * Make sure to base on 5.14, there's some new features that could be of use > * QEMU support in kunit.py: it's no longer as big of a deal if we > can't get tests running under UML. Brendan's made it fairly easy to > run tests in an x86 VM. > * Skipped tests support: can now mark a test skipped. Some of the > lib/ tests could benefit, e.g. test_hash.c > * another lib/ test conversion just landed in 5.14, [1], along with > kunit_kcalloc/kunit_malloc_array() helpers > * Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/running_tips.rst - has instructions > for how to generate code coverage reports using UML/kunit.py > * This seems like it could be useful... [2] > Thanks for those info! I wasn't aware of those features. > * I feel that the hackathon will surface a number of feature requests > for KUnit. Some patches might be blocked on these features (like your > uuid patch). > * Might be good to track these as they come up and note which > patches are blocked. > Good suggestion, I'll try to track this. > * Should we make a decision beforehand wrt renaming test files and > kconfig options to match the style guide? In the most recent > conversion [1], I left them as-is. The answer depends on the test > owner, but we should probably be consistent with what we do in the > v1's at least. > I believe that to left as-is is easier, and we will suggest people to do that. > * I assume test modules used in selftests (test_bitmap, test_printf, > etc.) should remain untouched for now ? > * KUnit does *not* return a non-zero exit code when you modprobe the > test, as the userspace part of those tests assumes. > * We could write a wrapper like kselftest/module.sh, but for KUnit > test modules, but this extra in-flight patch would become a dependency > for maybe multiple other conversions. > * I'd like it if we had ^ eventually, but I don't know how others > feel about that. > Yeah, I don't think we would be able to deal with all of this in this hackathon, so we won't touch those tests for now. > * I had some small patches for converting test_min_heap.c and > test_sort.c that I should get around to sending out. > So this means that we shouldn't convert them, right? > [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ebd09577be6c15ee2d343cf60e5bb819946a5ee8 > [2] I currently see > Overall coverage rate: > lines......: 16.4% (20034 of 122481 lines) > functions..: 18.1% (2032 of 11205 functions) > with the following kunitconfig > CONFIG_KUNIT=y > CONFIG_KUNIT_ALL_TESTS=y > CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL=y > CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO=y > CONFIG_GCOV=y > > This might be a neat way to motivate participants by showing #s going up. > Note: I'm more interested in the # of covered functions than anything else. > The %s are nice to look at, but not that useful since we're only > compiling a small fraction of kernel code. Cool! In the end of the hackathon we will compare the numbers to see how much we were able to do in the event. > >> may ask people to add a special tag to their patches so you may batch >> review them all at a later time if you wish. >> >> Anyhow, we'd really appreciate having your opinion on this. >> Thanks! >> >> [1] - https://flusp.ime.usp.br/ >> [2] - https://lkcamp.dev/ >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. >> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/83ff3ed3-e004-29b2-b23c-a2ba4d5a3f7f%40riseup.net.
