Re: [PATCH v9 01/18] kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core

From: Stephen Boyd
Date: Mon Jul 15 2019 - 16:10:58 EST


Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-07-12 01:17:27)
> 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@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx>

Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx>

Minor nits below.

> diff --git a/kunit/test.c b/kunit/test.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..571e4c65deb5c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/kunit/test.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,189 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * Base unit test (KUnit) API.
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2019, Google LLC.
> + * Author: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <kunit/test.h>
> +
> +static void kunit_set_failure(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + WRITE_ONCE(test->success, false);
> +}
> +
[...]
> +
> +void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name)
> +{
> + test->name = name;
> + test->success = true;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Performs all logic to run a test case.
> + */
> +static void kunit_run_case(struct kunit_suite *suite,
> + struct kunit_case *test_case)
> +{
> + struct kunit test;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + kunit_init_test(&test, test_case->name);
> +
> + if (suite->init) {
> + ret = suite->init(&test);

Can you push the ret definition into this if scope? That way we can
avoid default initialize to 0 for it.

> + if (ret) {
> + kunit_err(&test, "failed to initialize: %d\n", ret);
> + kunit_set_failure(&test);

Do we need to 'test_case->success = test.success' here too? Or is the
test failure extracted somewhere else?

> + return;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + test_case->run_case(&test);
> +
> + if (suite->exit)
> + suite->exit(&test);
> +
> + test_case->success = test.success;