Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] lib/test: introduce cpumask KUnit test suite

[Sander Vanheule]

Hi Maíra,

On Sun, 2022-07-31 at 12:23 -0300, Maíra Canal wrote:
> Hi Sander
> 
> On 7/29/22 04:01, Sander Vanheule wrote:
> > Add a basic suite of tests for cpumask, providing some tests for empty and
> > completely filled cpumasks.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Sander Vanheule <sander@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Suggested-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Changes since v4:
> > - Belated addition of Yury's Suggested-by:
> > - Follow KUnit style more closely
> > - Drop full check on cpu_possible_mask
> > - Update last check on cpu_possible_mask
> > - Log masks when starting test
> > - Update commit message 
> >   
> > Changes since v3:
> > - Test for_each_cpu*() over empty mask and cpu_possible_mask
> > - Add Andy's Reviewed-by
> > - Use num_{online,present,possible}_cpus() for builtin masks
> > - Guard against CPU hotplugging during test for dynamic builtin CPU masks
> >  
> > Changes since v2:
> > - Rework for_each_* test macros, as suggested by Yury
> > 
> > Changes since v1:
> > - New patch
> > 
> >  lib/Kconfig.debug  |  12 ++++
> >  lib/Makefile       |   1 +
> >  lib/cpumask_test.c | 147 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  3 files changed, 160 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 lib/cpumask_test.c
> > 
> > diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.debug b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> > index 2e24db4bff19..e85e74646178 100644
> > --- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
> > +++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> > @@ -2021,6 +2021,18 @@ config LKDTM
> >         Documentation on how to use the module can be found in
> >         Documentation/fault-injection/provoke-crashes.rst
> >  
> > +config CPUMASK_KUNIT_TEST
> > +       tristate "KUnit test for cpumask" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
> > +       depends on KUNIT
> > +       default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
> > +       help
> > +         Enable to turn on cpumask tests, running at boot or module load
> > time.
> > +
> > +         For more information on KUnit and unit tests in general, please
> > refer
> > +         to the KUnit documentation in Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/.
> > +
> > +         If unsure, say N.
> > +
> >  config TEST_LIST_SORT
> >         tristate "Linked list sorting test" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
> >         depends on KUNIT
> > diff --git a/lib/Makefile b/lib/Makefile
> > index bcc7e8ea0cde..9f9db1376538 100644
> > --- a/lib/Makefile
> > +++ b/lib/Makefile
> > @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_BPF) += test_bpf.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_FIRMWARE) += test_firmware.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_BITOPS) += test_bitops.o
> >  CFLAGS_test_bitops.o += -Werror
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_CPUMASK_KUNIT_TEST) += cpumask_test.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_SYSCTL) += test_sysctl.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_TEST_SIPHASH) += test_siphash.o
> >  obj-$(CONFIG_HASH_KUNIT_TEST) += test_hash.o
> > diff --git a/lib/cpumask_test.c b/lib/cpumask_test.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..0f8059a5e93b
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/lib/cpumask_test.c
> 
> In order to make the tests at lib/ with more compliant naming, it would
> make more sense to name it test_cpumask.c.
> 
> Thank you for the respin to the series! All tests are passing now.
> 
> Tested-by: Maíra Canal <mairacanal@xxxxxxxxxx>

I have posted some follow-up patches for the cpumask test suite:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1660068429.git.sander@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/

As you will see, I have not included your Tested-by: there.  The changes were
split, so I didn't want to just add your tag to the individual patches.  May I
ask you to re-test the new patches on top of current master, so you can provide
your Tested-by: where relevant?

Thanks,
Sander