On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 12:14AM -0700, David Gow wrote:
As discussed in [1], KUnit tests have hitherto not had a particularly consistent naming scheme. This adds documentation outlining how tests and test suites should be named, including how those names should be used in Kconfig entries and filenames.
Signed-off-by: David Gow davidgow@google.com Reviewed-by: Kees Cook keescook@chromium.org
...
+An example Kconfig entry:
+.. code-block:: none
config FOO_KUNIT_TESTtristate "KUnit test for foo" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTSdepends on KUNITdefault KUNIT_ALL_TESTShelpThis builds unit tests for foo.For more information on KUnit and unit tests in general, please referto the KUnit documentation in Documentation/dev-tools/kunitIf unsure, say N+Test Filenames +==============
+Where possible, test suites should be placed in a separate source file in the +same directory as the code being tested.
+This file should be named ``<suite>_kunit.c``. It may make sense to strip +excessive namespacing from the source filename (e.g., ``firmware_kunit.c`` instead of +``<drivername>_firmware.c``), but please ensure the module name does contain the +full suite name.
First of all, thanks for the talk yesterday! I only looked at this because somebody pasted the LKML link. :-)
The example about excessive namespacing seems confusing. Was it supposed to be
[...] firmware_kunit.c`` instead of ``<drivername>_firmware_kunit.c [...]
?
While I guess this ship has sailed, and *_kunit.c is the naming convention now, I hope this is still just a recommendation and names of the form *-test.c are not banned!
$> git grep 'KUNIT.*-test.o' drivers/base/power/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM_QOS_KUNIT_TEST) += qos-test.o drivers/base/test/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_DRIVER_PE_TEST) += property-entry-test.o fs/ext4/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_EXT4_KUNIT_TESTS) += ext4-inode-test.o kernel/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_SYSCTL_KUNIT_TEST) += sysctl-test.o lib/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_LIST_KUNIT_TEST) += list-test.o lib/kunit/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) += kunit-test.o lib/kunit/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) += string-stream-test.o lib/kunit/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST) += kunit-example-test.o
$> git grep 'KUNIT.*_kunit.o' # Returns nothing
Just an idea: Maybe the names are also an opportunity to distinguish real _unit_ style tests and then the rarer integration-style tests. I personally prefer using the more generic *-test.c, at least for the integration-style tests I've been working on (KUnit is still incredibly valuable for integration-style tests, because otherwise I'd have to roll my own poor-man's version of KUnit, so thank you!). Using *_kunit.c for such tests is unintuitive, because the word "unit" hints at "unit tests" -- and having descriptive (and not misleading) filenames is still important. So I hope you won't mind if *-test.c are still used where appropriate.
Thanks, -- Marco