On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 03:14:45PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 2:44 PM Luis Chamberlain firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Since its a new architecture and since you seem to imply most tests don't require locking or even IRQs disabled, I think its worth to consider the impact of adding such extreme locking requirements for an initial ramp up.
Fair enough, I can see the point of not wanting to use irq disabled until we get someone complaining about it, but I think making it thread safe is reasonable. It means there is one less thing to confuse a KUnit user and the only penalty paid is some very minor performance.
One reason I'm really excited about kunit is speed... so by all means I think we're at a good point to analyze performance optimizationsm if they do make sense.
While on the topic of parallization, what about support for running different test cases in parallel? Or at the very least different kunit modules in parallel. Few questions come up based on this prospect:
* Why not support parallelism from the start? * Are you opposed to eventually having this added? For instance, there is enough code on lib/test_kmod.c for batching tons of kthreads each one running its own thing for testing purposes which could be used as template. * If we eventually *did* support it: - Would logs be skewed? - Could we have a way to query: give me log for only kunit module named "foo"?