On 12/1/20 4:31 PM, Marco Elver wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 23:28, Shuah Khan skhan@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On 11/30/20 3:22 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 11:25 PM David Gow davidgow@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 9:08 PM Marco Elver elver@google.com wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 at 08:21, David Gow davidgow@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 1:41 PM Arpitha Raghunandan 98.arpi@gmail.com wrote: > > Implementation of support for parameterized testing in KUnit. This > approach requires the creation of a test case using the > KUNIT_CASE_PARAM() macro that accepts a generator function as input. > > This generator function should return the next parameter given the > previous parameter in parameterized tests. It also provides a macro to > generate common-case generators based on arrays. Generators may also > optionally provide a human-readable description of parameters, which is > displayed where available. > > Note, currently the result of each parameter run is displayed in > diagnostic lines, and only the overall test case output summarizes > TAP-compliant success or failure of all parameter runs. In future, when > supported by kunit-tool, these can be turned into subsubtest outputs. > > Signed-off-by: Arpitha Raghunandan 98.arpi@gmail.com > Co-developed-by: Marco Elver elver@google.com > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver elver@google.com > --- [Resending this because my email client re-defaulted to HTML! Aarrgh!]
This looks good to me! I tested it in UML and x86-64 w/ KASAN, and both worked fine.
Reviewed-by: David Gow davidgow@google.com Tested-by: David Gow davidgow@google.com
Thank you!
Thanks for sticking with this!
Will these patches be landing in 5.11 or 5.12?
I can't think of any reason not to have these in 5.11. We haven't started staging things in the kselftest/kunit branch for 5.11 yet, though.
Patch 2 will probably need to be acked by Ted for ext4 first.
Brendan, Shuah: can you make sure this doesn't get lost in patchwork?
Looks good to me. I would definitely like to pick this up. But yeah, in order to pick up 2/2 we will need an ack from either Ted or Iurii.
Ted seems to be busy right now, so I think I will just ask Shuah to go ahead and pick this patch up by itself and we or Ted can pick up patch 2/2 later.
Cheers
I am seeing
ERROR: need consistent spacing around '*' (ctx:WxV) #272: FILE: include/kunit/test.h:1786:
typeof((array)[0]) *__next = prev ? ((typeof(__next)) prev) + 1 :(array); \ ^
Can you look into this and send v10?
This is a false positive. I pointed this out here before: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CANpmjNNhpe6TYt0KmBCCR-Wfz1Bxd8qnhiwegwnDQsxRAWmUM...
checkpatch.pl thinks this is a multiplication, but this is a pointer, so the spacing here is correct.
Thank you for confirming. I will apply this.
thanks, -- Shuah