Currently in order to test a static function, tests must be included in the
same translation unit as the function. However, this can cause issues with
including implementation and test code in the same file. As an alternative,
the first patch in this series creates a macro that will set a function to
be static or not depending on whether CONFIG_KUNIT is enabled. This allows
the function to be visible during testing and static otherwise.
As an example, the current status quo to test static functions is:
=== test.c ===
static void test_case(struct kunit *test)
{
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, my_func_to_test(), 2);
}
Then the tests are included in the implementation file as a workaround to
the issue of testing static functions:
=== implementation.c ===
static int my_func_to_test() {...}
...
#include "test.c"
Instead, the function could be defined with this new macro:
=== implementation.c ===
VISIBLE_IF_KUNIT int my_func_to_test() {...}
The first patch also creates a macro that will export a symbol into a kunit
testing namespace only if CONFIG_KUNIT is enabled. This follows the logic
above and allows symbols to be conditionally exported based on the testing
status.
The second patch in the series updates the policy_unpack test in AppArmor
to show an example of how to use both of these macros in order to address
the issue of testing static functions.
Rae Moar (2):
kunit: add macro to allow conditionally exposing static symbols to
tests
apparmor: test: make static symbols visible during kunit testing
include/kunit/visibility.h | 32 ++++++++++
security/apparmor/Kconfig | 4 +-
security/apparmor/Makefile | 2 +
security/apparmor/include/policy_unpack.h | 50 ++++++++++++++++
security/apparmor/policy_unpack.c | 72 +++++++----------------
security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c | 5 ++
6 files changed, 112 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 include/kunit/visibility.h
base-commit: 11e76194937b506caf1b49512c42d5c2588681d7
--
2.38.1.273.g43a17bfeac-goog
