On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 11:19AM -0700, 'Daniel Latypov' via kasan-dev wrote:
> Currently, the kfence test suite could not run via "normal" means since
> KUnit didn't support per-suite setup/teardown. So it manually called
> internal kunit functions to run itself.
> This has some downsides, like missing TAP headers => can't use kunit.py
> to run or even parse the test results (w/o tweaks).
>
> Use the newly added support and convert it over, adding a .kunitconfig
> so it's even easier to run from kunit.py.
>
> People can now run the test via
> $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --kunitconfig=mm/kfence --arch=x86_64
> ...
> [11:02:32] Testing complete. Passed: 23, Failed: 0, Crashed: 0, Skipped: 2, Errors: 0
> [11:02:32] Elapsed time: 43.562s total, 0.003s configuring, 9.268s building, 34.281s running
>
> Cc: kasan-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/kfence/.kunitconfig | 6 ++++++
> mm/kfence/kfence_test.c | 31 +++++++++++++------------------
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 mm/kfence/.kunitconfig
>
> diff --git a/mm/kfence/.kunitconfig b/mm/kfence/.kunitconfig
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..f3d65e939bfa
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/mm/kfence/.kunitconfig
> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> +CONFIG_KUNIT=y
> +CONFIG_KFENCE=y
> +CONFIG_KFENCE_KUNIT_TEST=y
> +
> +# Additional dependencies.
> +CONFIG_FTRACE=y
> diff --git a/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c b/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c
> index 1b50f70a4c0f..96206a4ee9ab 100644
> --- a/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c
> +++ b/mm/kfence/kfence_test.c
> @@ -826,14 +826,6 @@ static void test_exit(struct kunit *test)
> test_cache_destroy();
> }
>
> -static struct kunit_suite kfence_test_suite = {
> - .name = "kfence",
> - .test_cases = kfence_test_cases,
> - .init = test_init,
> - .exit = test_exit,
> -};
> -static struct kunit_suite *kfence_test_suites[] = { &kfence_test_suite, NULL };
> -
> static void register_tracepoints(struct tracepoint *tp, void *ignore)
> {
> check_trace_callback_type_console(probe_console);
> @@ -847,11 +839,7 @@ static void unregister_tracepoints(struct tracepoint *tp, void *ignore)
> tracepoint_probe_unregister(tp, probe_console, NULL);
> }
>
> -/*
> - * We only want to do tracepoints setup and teardown once, therefore we have to
> - * customize the init and exit functions and cannot rely on kunit_test_suite().
> - */
> -static int __init kfence_test_init(void)
> +static int kfence_suite_init(struct kunit_suite *suite)
> {
> /*
> * Because we want to be able to build the test as a module, we need to
> @@ -859,18 +847,25 @@ static int __init kfence_test_init(void)
> * won't work here.
> */
> for_each_kernel_tracepoint(register_tracepoints, NULL);
> - return __kunit_test_suites_init(kfence_test_suites);
> + return 0;
> }
>
> -static void kfence_test_exit(void)
> +static void kfence_suite_exit(struct kunit_suite *suite)
> {
> - __kunit_test_suites_exit(kfence_test_suites);
> for_each_kernel_tracepoint(unregister_tracepoints, NULL);
> tracepoint_synchronize_unregister();
> }
>
> -late_initcall_sync(kfence_test_init);
> -module_exit(kfence_test_exit);
> +static struct kunit_suite kfence_test_suite = {
> + .name = "kfence",
> + .test_cases = kfence_test_cases,
> + .init = test_init,
> + .exit = test_exit,
> + .suite_init = kfence_suite_init,
> + .suite_exit = kfence_suite_exit,
> +};
> +
> +kunit_test_suites(&kfence_test_suite);
Much nicer!
Thanks,
-- Marco
