Em Mon, 31 Jul 2023 16:10:24 +0200 Janusz Krzysztofik janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com escreveu:
Results from kunit tests reported via dmesg may be interleaved with other kernel messages. When parsing dmesg for modular kunit results in real time, external tools, e.g., Intel GPU tools (IGT), may want to insert their own test name markers into dmesg at the start of each test, before any kernel message related to that test appears there, so existing upper level test result parsers have no doubt which test to blame for a specific kernel message. Unfortunately, kunit reports names of tests only at their completion (with the exeption of a not standarized "# Subtest: <name>" header above a test plan of each test suite or parametrized test).
External tools could be able to insert their own "start of the test" markers with test names included if they new those names in advance. Test names could be learned from a list if provided by a kunit test module.
There exists a feature of listing kunit tests without actually executing them, but it is now limited to configurations with the kunit module built in and covers only built-in tests, already available at boot time. Moreover, switching from list to normal mode requires reboot. If that feature was also available when kunit is built as a module, userspace could load the module with action=list parameter, load some kunit test modules they are interested in and learn about the list of tests provided by those modules, then unload them, reload the kunit module in normal mode and execute the tests with their lists already known.
Extend kunit module notifier initialization callback with a processing path for only listing the tests provided by a module if the kunit action parameter is set to "list". For ease of use, submit the list in the format of a standard KTAP report, with SKIP result from each test case, giving "list mode" as the reason for skipping. For each test suite provided by a kunit test module, make such list of its test cases also available via kunit debugfs for the lifetime of the module. For user convenience, make the kunit.action parameter visible in sysfs.
It sounds interesting to have a modprobe option to just list the tests without excecuting.
Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com
include/kunit/test.h | 1 + lib/kunit/executor.c | 19 +++++++++++++------ lib/kunit/test.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h index 23120d50499ef..6d693f21a4833 100644 --- a/include/kunit/test.h +++ b/include/kunit/test.h @@ -237,6 +237,7 @@ static inline void kunit_set_failure(struct kunit *test) } bool kunit_enabled(void); +const char *kunit_action(void); void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log); diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c index 74982b83707ca..d1c0616569dfd 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c @@ -12,19 +12,26 @@ extern struct kunit_suite * const __kunit_suites_start[]; extern struct kunit_suite * const __kunit_suites_end[]; +static char *action_param;
+module_param_named(action, action_param, charp, 0400); +MODULE_PARM_DESC(action,
"Changes KUnit executor behavior, valid values are:\n""<none>: run the tests like normal\n""'list' to list test names instead of running them.\n");
Help message sounded confusing. What about adding a boolean modprobe parameter, like "list_tests"?
+const char *kunit_action(void) +{
- return action_param;
+}
#if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_KUNIT) static char *filter_glob_param; -static char *action_param; module_param_named(filter_glob, filter_glob_param, charp, 0); MODULE_PARM_DESC(filter_glob, "Filter which KUnit test suites/tests run at boot-time, e.g. list* or list*.*del_test"); -module_param_named(action, action_param, charp, 0); -MODULE_PARM_DESC(action,
"Changes KUnit executor behavior, valid values are:\n""<none>: run the tests like normal\n""'list' to list test names instead of running them.\n");/* glob_match() needs NULL terminated strings, so we need a copy of filter_glob_param. */ struct kunit_test_filter { diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c index a29ca1acc4d81..413d9fd364a8d 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c @@ -674,6 +674,27 @@ int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_run_tests); +static void kunit_list_suite(struct kunit_suite *suite) +{
- struct kunit_case *test_case;
- kunit_print_suite_start(suite);
- kunit_suite_for_each_test_case(suite, test_case) {
struct kunit test = { .param_value = NULL, .param_index = 0 };kunit_init_test(&test, test_case->name, test_case->log);kunit_print_ok_not_ok(&test, true, KUNIT_SKIPPED,kunit_test_case_num(suite, test_case),test_case->name, "list mode");- }
- kunit_print_ok_not_ok((void *)suite, false, KUNIT_SKIPPED,
kunit_suite_counter++,suite->name, "list mode");+}
static void kunit_init_suite(struct kunit_suite *suite) { kunit_debugfs_create_suite(suite); @@ -688,6 +709,7 @@ bool kunit_enabled(void) int __kunit_test_suites_init(struct kunit_suite * const * const suites, int num_suites) {
- const char *action = kunit_action(); unsigned int i;
if (!kunit_enabled() && num_suites > 0) { @@ -699,7 +721,13 @@ int __kunit_test_suites_init(struct kunit_suite * const * const suites, int num_ for (i = 0; i < num_suites; i++) { kunit_init_suite(suites[i]);
kunit_run_tests(suites[i]);
if (!action)kunit_run_tests(suites[i]);else if (!strcmp(action, "list"))kunit_list_suite(suites[i]);elsepr_err("kunit: unknown action '%s'\n", action);static_branch_dec(&kunit_running);
The remaining code LGTM.
Thanks, Mauro