Re: [RESEND PATCH v7 linux-kselftest-test 3/6] kunit: allow kunit tests to be loaded as a module
From: shuah <shuah@kernel.org>
Date: 2020-01-07 23:04:16
Also in:
linux-kselftest, lkml
Hi Alan, Thanks for the resend. On 1/6/20 3:28 PM, Alan Maguire wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
As tests are added to kunit, it will become less feasible to execute all built tests together. By supporting modular tests we provide a simple way to do selective execution on a running system; specifying CONFIG_KUNIT=y CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST=m ...means we can simply "insmod example-test.ko" to run the tests. To achieve this we need to do the following: o export the required symbols in kunit o string-stream tests utilize non-exported symbols so for now we skip building them when CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST=m. o drivers/base/power/qos-test.c contains a few unexported interface references, namely freq_qos_read_value() and freq_constraints_init(). Both of these could be potentially defined as static inline functions in include/linux/pm_qos.h, but for now we simply avoid supporting module build for that test suite. o support a new way of declaring test suites. Because a module cannot do multiple late_initcall()s, we provide a kunit_test_suites() macro to declare multiple suites within the same module at once. o some test module names would have been too general ("test-test" and "example-test" for kunit tests, "inode-test" for ext4 tests); rename these as appropriate ("kunit-test", "kunit-example-test" and "ext4-inode-test" respectively). Also define kunit_test_suite() via kunit_test_suites() as callers in other trees may need the old definition. Co-developed-by: Knut Omang <redacted> Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <redacted> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <redacted> Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <redacted> Acked-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> # for ext4 bits Acked-by: David Gow <redacted> # For list-test Reported-by: kbuild test robot <redacted> --- drivers/base/power/qos-test.c | 2 +- fs/ext4/Kconfig | 2 +- fs/ext4/Makefile | 3 +- fs/ext4/inode-test.c | 4 ++- include/kunit/test.h | 37 ++++++++++++++++------ kernel/sysctl-test.c | 4 ++- lib/Kconfig.debug | 4 +-- lib/kunit/Kconfig | 4 +-- lib/kunit/Makefile | 10 ++++-- lib/kunit/assert.c | 8 +++++ lib/kunit/{example-test.c => kunit-example-test.c} | 4 ++- lib/kunit/{test-test.c => kunit-test.c} | 5 +-- lib/kunit/string-stream-test.c | 2 +- lib/kunit/test.c | 8 +++++ lib/kunit/try-catch.c | 2 ++ lib/list-test.c | 4 ++- 16 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) rename lib/kunit/{example-test.c => kunit-example-test.c} (97%) rename lib/kunit/{test-test.c => kunit-test.c} (98%)diff --git a/drivers/base/power/qos-test.c b/drivers/base/power/qos-test.c index 3115db0..79fc6c4 100644 --- a/drivers/base/power/qos-test.c +++ b/drivers/base/power/qos-test.c@@ -114,4 +114,4 @@ static void freq_qos_test_readd(struct kunit *test) .name = "qos-kunit-test", .test_cases = pm_qos_test_cases, }; -kunit_test_suite(pm_qos_test_module); +kunit_test_suites(&pm_qos_test_module);diff --git a/fs/ext4/Kconfig b/fs/ext4/Kconfig index ef42ab0..435510f 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/Kconfig +++ b/fs/ext4/Kconfig@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ config EXT4_DEBUG echo 1 > /sys/module/ext4/parameters/mballoc_debug config EXT4_KUNIT_TESTS - bool "KUnit tests for ext4" + tristate "KUnit tests for ext4" select EXT4_FS depends on KUNIT helpdiff --git a/fs/ext4/Makefile b/fs/ext4/Makefile index 840b91d..4ccb3c9 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/Makefile +++ b/fs/ext4/Makefile@@ -13,5 +13,6 @@ ext4-y := balloc.o bitmap.o block_validity.o dir.o ext4_jbd2.o extents.o \ ext4-$(CONFIG_EXT4_FS_POSIX_ACL) += acl.o ext4-$(CONFIG_EXT4_FS_SECURITY) += xattr_security.o -ext4-$(CONFIG_EXT4_KUNIT_TESTS) += inode-test.o +ext4-inode-test-objs += inode-test.o +obj-$(CONFIG_EXT4_KUNIT_TESTS) += ext4-inode-test.o ext4-$(CONFIG_FS_VERITY) += verity.odiff --git a/fs/ext4/inode-test.c b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c index 92a9da1..95620bf 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/inode-test.c +++ b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c@@ -269,4 +269,6 @@ static void inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding(struct kunit *test) .test_cases = ext4_inode_test_cases, }; -kunit_test_suite(ext4_inode_test_suite); +kunit_test_suites(&ext4_inode_test_suite); + +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h index dba4830..2dfb550 100644 --- a/include/kunit/test.h +++ b/include/kunit/test.h@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <kunit/assert.h> #include <kunit/try-catch.h> #include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h> #include <linux/slab.h> #include <linux/types.h>@@ -197,31 +198,47 @@ struct kunit { int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite); /** - * kunit_test_suite() - used to register a &struct kunit_suite with KUnit. + * kunit_test_suites() - used to register one or more &struct kunit_suite + * with KUnit. * - * @suite: a statically allocated &struct kunit_suite. + * @suites: a statically allocated list of &struct kunit_suite. * - * Registers @suite with the test framework. See &struct kunit_suite for + * Registers @suites with the test framework. See &struct kunit_suite for * more information. * - * NOTE: Currently KUnit tests are all run as late_initcalls; this means + * When builtin, KUnit tests are all run as late_initcalls; this means * that they cannot test anything where tests must run at a different init * phase. One significant restriction resulting from this is that KUnit * cannot reliably test anything that is initialize in the late_init phase; * another is that KUnit is useless to test things that need to be run in * an earlier init phase. * + * An alternative is to build the tests as a module. Because modules + * do not support multiple late_initcall()s, we need to initialize an + * array of suites for a module. + * * TODO(brendanhiggins@google.com): Don't run all KUnit tests as * late_initcalls. I have some future work planned to dispatch all KUnit * tests from the same place, and at the very least to do so after * everything else is definitely initialized. */ -#define kunit_test_suite(suite) \ - static int kunit_suite_init##suite(void) \ - { \ - return kunit_run_tests(&suite); \ - } \ - late_initcall(kunit_suite_init##suite) +#define kunit_test_suites(...) \ + static struct kunit_suite *suites[] = { __VA_ARGS__, NULL}; \ + static int kunit_test_suites_init(void) \ + { \ + unsigned int i; \ + for (i = 0; suites[i] != NULL; i++) \ + kunit_run_tests(suites[i]); \ + return 0; \ + } \ + late_initcall(kunit_test_suites_init); \ + static void __exit kunit_test_suites_exit(void) \ + { \ + return; \ + } \ + module_exit(kunit_test_suites_exit) + +#define kunit_test_suite(suite) kunit_test_suites(&suite)
This macro is getting more and more complex. Is there a good reason for this code to stay as a macro? thanks, -- Shuah