Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] kunit: support failure from dynamic analysis tools

[Alan Maguire]

On Tue, 9 Feb 2021, Daniel Latypov wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 9:26 AM Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 5 Feb 2021, Daniel Latypov wrote:
> >
> > > From: Uriel Guajardo <urielguajardo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Add a kunit_fail_current_test() function to fail the currently running
> > > test, if any, with an error message.
> > >
> > > This is largely intended for dynamic analysis tools like UBSAN and for
> > > fakes.
> > > E.g. say I had a fake ops struct for testing and I wanted my `free`
> > > function to complain if it was called with an invalid argument, or
> > > caught a double-free. Most return void and have no normal means of
> > > signalling failure (e.g. super_operations, iommu_ops, etc.).
> > >
> > > Key points:
> > > * Always update current->kunit_test so anyone can use it.
> > >   * commit 83c4e7a0363b ("KUnit: KASAN Integration") only updated it for
> > >   CONFIG_KASAN=y
> > >
> > > * Create a new header <kunit/test-bug.h> so non-test code doesn't have
> > > to include all of <kunit/test.h> (e.g. lib/ubsan.c)
> > >
> > > * Forward the file and line number to make it easier to track down
> > > failures
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for doing this!
> >
> > > * Declare it as a function for nice __printf() warnings about mismatched
> > > format strings even when KUnit is not enabled.
> > >
> >
> > One thing I _think_ this assumes is that KUnit is builtin;
> > don't we need an
> 
> Ah, you're correct.
> Also going to rename it to have two _ to match other functions used in
> macros like __kunit_test_suites_init.
> 

Great! If you're sending out an updated version with these
changes, feel free to add

Reviewed-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx>