On Tue Aug 18, 2026 at 9:44 PM BST, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2026 at 5:23 PM Yury Norov [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Make every Rust KUnit test suite require the Kconfig option that controls
it, and let the `kunit_tests` macro apply the corresponding `#[cfg]`
attribute.
If we are sure we always want at least one `cfg` guarding them, then
yeah, this makes sense (we could ask to write the `cfg` bit inside,
for "greppability", and for clarity / less ambiguity later on).
David: are there cases on KUnit where you would recommend/prefer
something different?
For instance, I could imagine a Rust `mod` for testing purposes
already gated by a `cfg` that is meant to contain many tests, and then
different suites inside that for control (possibly with extra `cfg`s,
but maybe none too for some).
There might also be cases where we want some other conditional (like combination
of cfgs) to gate.
I am okay with gating existing ones under new cfgs, but requiring one in macro
invocation itself sounds bit excessive, and also doesn't look nice :)
If we decide on actually requiring one, a better option might me for me to
implement a lint in klint to produce a warning that is suppressable if people
actually don't want to use cfgs.
Best,
Gary