Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add support for inlined documentation for kunit and kselftests

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em Tue, 03 Oct 2023 11:00:20 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> escreveu:

> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > This is a follow-up of the discussions taken here:
> >
> >    https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/20230704132812.02ba97ba@maurocar-mobl2/T/#t
> >
> > I sent a previous version as RFC. This is basically what we had there, with some
> > improvements at test_list.py.
> >
> > It adds a new extension that allows documenting tests using the same tool we're
> > using for DRM unit tests at IGT GPU tools: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools.
> >
> > While kernel-doc has provided documentation for in-lined functions/struct comments,
> > it was not meant to document tests.
> >
> > Tests need to be grouped by the test functions. It should also be possible to produce
> > other outputs from the documentation, to integrate it with test suites. For instance, 
> > Internally at Intel, we use the comments to generate DOT files hierarchically grouped
> > per feature categories.
> >
> > This is meant to be an initial series to start documenting kunit.  
> 
> I've played with this a bit...a couple of quick impressions:
> 
> - That's quite a chunk of Python code to be adding.  I've not yet had
>   the chance to read it through properly, will hopefully be able to do
>   so soon.  A bit more commenting would not have gone amiss here...

I'll try to add more comments when respin this series.

I guess I should also add a documentation similar to the one I wrote
for IGT [1]:
	https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools/-/blob/master/docs/test_documentation.md?ref_type=heads#documenting-tests-via-testplan

[1] this document is specific for the way IGT uses it; I'll write
    something similar to it considering the names we've agreed for
    KUnit.

> 
> - I kind of think that this should go under dev-tools rather than being
>   a new top-level directory.  Is there a reason not to put it there?

No particular reason. I'll change it to be under dev-tools/tests at
the next submission.

Should I wait for you to take a look at patch 1/2 before sending
a new version?

Regards,
Mauro