On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:40 PM Kees Cook keescook@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 02:09:15PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
From: David Gow davidgow@google.com
Add a new kernel command-line option, 'kunit_shutdown', which allows the user to specify that the kernel poweroff, halt, or reboot after completing all KUnit tests; this is very handy for running KUnit tests on UML or a VM so that the UML/VM process exits cleanly immediately after running all tests without needing a special initramfs.
Signed-off-by: David Gow davidgow@google.com Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins brendanhiggins@google.com Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd sboyd@kernel.org
lib/kunit/executor.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 2 +- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py | 2 +- 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c index a95742a4ece73..38061d456afb2 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+#include <linux/reboot.h> #include <kunit/test.h>
/* @@ -11,6 +12,23 @@ extern struct kunit_suite * const * const __kunit_suites_end[];
#if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_KUNIT)
+static char *kunit_shutdown; +core_param(kunit_shutdown, kunit_shutdown, charp, 0644);
+static void kunit_handle_shutdown(void) +{
if (!kunit_shutdown)return;if (!strcmp(kunit_shutdown, "poweroff"))kernel_power_off();else if (!strcmp(kunit_shutdown, "halt"))kernel_halt();else if (!strcmp(kunit_shutdown, "reboot"))kernel_restart(NULL);+}
If you have patches that do something just before the initrd, and then you add more patches to shut down immediately after an initrd, people may ask you to just use an initrd instead of filling the kernel with these changes...
I mean, I get it, but it's not hard to make an initrd that poke a sysctl to start the tests...
In fact, you don't even need a initrd to poke sysctls these days.
True, but it is nice to not have to maintain an initramfs for each architecture that you want to test. Still, I see your point. If we can find a convenient way to distribute the needed dependencies for running KUnit on each non-UML architecture then I think I can abandon this change.
So how about this: I will drop this patch from this patchset and move it up to the follow up patchset that adds multiarchitecture support to kunit_tool. There we can address the problem of how to best track the necessary dependencies including possibly intitramfss.