| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Previously KUnit assumed that printk would always be present, which is
not a valid assumption to make. Fix that by removing call to
vprintk_emit, and calling printk directly.
This fixes a build error[1] reported by Randy.
For context this change comes after much discussion. My first stab[2] at
this was just to make the KUnit logging code compile out; however, it
was agreed that if we were going to use vprintk_emit, then vprintk_emit
should provide a no-op stub, which lead to my second attempt[3]. In
response to me trying to stub out vprintk_emit, Sergey Senozhatsky
suggested a way for me to remove our usage of vprintk_emit, which led to
my third attempt at solving this[4].
In my third version of this patch[4], I completely removed vprintk_emit,
as suggested by Sergey; however, there was a bit of debate over whether
Sergey's solution was the best. The debate arose due to Sergey's version
resulting in a checkpatch warning, which resulted in a debate over
correct printk usage. Joe Perches offered an alternative fix which was
somewhat less far reaching than what Sergey had suggested and
importantly relied on continuing to use %pV. Much of the debated
centered around whether %pV should be widely used, and whether Sergey's
version would result in object size bloat. Ultimately, we decided to go
with Sergey's version.
Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Link[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/c7229254-0d90-d90e-f3df-5b6d6fc0b51f@infradead.org/
Link[2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20190827174932.44177-1-brendanhiggins@google.com/
Link[3]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20190827234835.234473-1-brendanhiggins@google.com/
Link[4]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20190828093143.163302-1-brendanhiggins@google.com/
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Tim.Bird@sony.com
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> # build-tested
Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Add support for assertions which are like expectations except the test
terminates if the assertion is not satisfied.
The idea with assertions is that you use them to state all the
preconditions for your test. Logically speaking, these are the premises
of the test case, so if a premise isn't true, there is no point in
continuing the test case because there are no conclusions that can be
drawn without the premises. Whereas, the expectation is the thing you
are trying to prove. It is not used universally in x-unit style test
frameworks, but I really like it as a convention. You could still
express the idea of a premise using the above idiom, but I think
KUNIT_ASSERT_* states the intended idea perfectly.
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Add support for aborting/bailing out of test cases, which is needed for
implementing assertions.
An assertion is like an expectation, but bails out of the test case
early if the assertion is not met. The idea with assertions is that you
use them to state all the preconditions for your test. Logically
speaking, these are the premises of the test case, so if a premise isn't
true, there is no point in continuing the test case because there are no
conclusions that can be drawn without the premises. Whereas, the
expectation is the thing you are trying to prove.
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Add support for expectations, which allow properties to be specified and
then verified in tests.
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Add `struct kunit_assert` and friends which provide a structured way to
capture data from an expectation or an assertion (introduced later in
the series) so that it may be printed out in the event of a failure.
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
A number of test features need to do pretty complicated string printing
where it may not be possible to rely on a single preallocated string
with parameters.
So provide a library for constructing the string as you go similar to
C++'s std::string. string_stream is really just a string builder,
nothing more.
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Create a common API for test managed resources like memory and test
objects. A lot of times a test will want to set up infrastructure to be
used in test cases; this could be anything from just wanting to allocate
some memory to setting up a driver stack; this defines facilities for
creating "test resources" which are managed by the test infrastructure
and are automatically cleaned up at the conclusion of the test.
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
|
|
Add core facilities for defining unit tests; this provides a common way
to define test cases, functions that execute code which is under test
and determine whether the code under test behaves as expected; this also
provides a way to group together related test cases in test suites (here
we call them test_modules).
Just define test cases and how to execute them for now; setting
expectations on code will be defined later.
Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
|
