Implementation of support for parameterized testing in KUnit.
Signed-off-by: Arpitha Raghunandan 98.arpi@gmail.com --- include/kunit/test.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ lib/kunit/test.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h index 59f3144f009a..4740d66269b4 100644 --- a/include/kunit/test.h +++ b/include/kunit/test.h @@ -140,10 +140,14 @@ struct kunit; struct kunit_case { void (*run_case)(struct kunit *test); const char *name; + void* (*get_params)(void); + int max_parameters_count; + int parameter_size;
/* private: internal use only. */ bool success; char *log; + bool parameterized; };
static inline char *kunit_status_to_string(bool status) @@ -162,6 +166,11 @@ static inline char *kunit_status_to_string(bool status) */ #define KUNIT_CASE(test_name) { .run_case = test_name, .name = #test_name }
+#define KUNIT_CASE_PARAM(test_name, getparams, count, size) \ + { .run_case = test_name, .name = #test_name, \ + .parameterized = true, .get_params = (void* (*)(void))getparams, \ + .max_parameters_count = count, .parameter_size = size } + /** * struct kunit_suite - describes a related collection of &struct kunit_case * @@ -206,6 +215,23 @@ struct kunit { /* private: internal use only. */ const char *name; /* Read only after initialization! */ char *log; /* Points at case log after initialization */ + bool parameterized; /* True for parameterized tests */ + /* param_values stores the test parameters + * for parameterized tests. + */ + void *param_values; + /* max_parameters_count indicates maximum number of + * parameters for parameterized tests. + */ + int max_parameters_count; + /* iterator_count is used by the iterator method + * for parameterized tests. + */ + int iterator_count; + /* parameter_size indicates size of a single test case + * for parameterized tests. + */ + int parameter_size; struct kunit_try_catch try_catch; /* * success starts as true, and may only be set to false during a @@ -225,6 +251,7 @@ struct kunit { };
void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log); +void kunit_init_param_test(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_case *test_case);
int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite);
@@ -237,6 +264,8 @@ int __kunit_test_suites_init(struct kunit_suite **suites);
void __kunit_test_suites_exit(struct kunit_suite **suites);
+void *get_test_case_parameters(struct kunit *test); + /** * kunit_test_suites() - used to register one or more &struct kunit_suite * with KUnit. diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c index c36037200310..ab9e13c81d4a 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c @@ -142,6 +142,11 @@ unsigned int kunit_test_case_num(struct kunit_suite *suite, } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_test_case_num);
+static void kunit_print_failed_param(struct kunit *test) +{ + kunit_err(test, "\n\tTest failed at parameter: %d\n", test->iterator_count); +} + static void kunit_print_string_stream(struct kunit *test, struct string_stream *stream) { @@ -182,6 +187,9 @@ static void kunit_fail(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_assert *assert)
assert->format(assert, stream);
+ if (test->parameterized) + kunit_print_failed_param(test); + kunit_print_string_stream(test, stream);
WARN_ON(string_stream_destroy(stream)); @@ -236,6 +244,18 @@ void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_init_test);
+void kunit_init_param_test(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_case *test_case) +{ + spin_lock_init(&test->lock); + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&test->resources); + test->parameterized = true; + test->param_values = (void *)(test_case->get_params()); + test->max_parameters_count = test_case->max_parameters_count; + test->parameter_size = test_case->parameter_size; + test->iterator_count = 0; +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_init_param_test); + /* * Initializes and runs test case. Does not clean up or do post validations. */ @@ -254,7 +274,14 @@ static void kunit_run_case_internal(struct kunit *test, } }
- test_case->run_case(test); + if (!test->parameterized) { + test_case->run_case(test); + } else { + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < test->max_parameters_count; i++) + test_case->run_case(test); + } }
static void kunit_case_internal_cleanup(struct kunit *test) @@ -343,6 +370,8 @@ static void kunit_run_case_catch_errors(struct kunit_suite *suite, struct kunit test;
kunit_init_test(&test, test_case->name, test_case->log); + if (test_case->parameterized) + kunit_init_param_test(&test, test_case); try_catch = &test.try_catch;
kunit_try_catch_init(try_catch, @@ -407,6 +436,19 @@ void __kunit_test_suites_exit(struct kunit_suite **suites) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__kunit_test_suites_exit);
+/* + * Iterator method for the parameterized test cases + */ +void *get_test_case_parameters(struct kunit *test) +{ + int index = test->iterator_count * test->parameter_size; + + if (test->iterator_count != test->max_parameters_count) + test->iterator_count++; + return (test->param_values + index); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(get_test_case_parameters); + /* * Used for static resources and when a kunit_resource * has been created by * kunit_alloc_resource(). When an init function is supplied, @data is passed
Modifies fs/ext4/inode-test.c to use the parameterized testing feature of KUnit.
Signed-off-by: Arpitha Raghunandan 98.arpi@gmail.com --- fs/ext4/inode-test.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode-test.c b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c index d62d802c9c12..691ef0a4ffe1 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/inode-test.c +++ b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c @@ -72,6 +72,8 @@ #define UPPER_BOUND_NONNEG_EXTRA_BITS_1_CASE\ "2446-05-10 Upper bound of 32bit >=0 timestamp. All extra sec bits on"
+#define NUMBER_OF_TESTCASES 16 + struct timestamp_expectation { const char *test_case_name; struct timespec64 expected; @@ -101,7 +103,36 @@ static time64_t get_32bit_time(const struct timestamp_expectation * const test) */ static void inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding(struct kunit *test) { - const struct timestamp_expectation test_data[] = { + struct timespec64 timestamp; + + struct timestamp_expectation *test_data = + (struct timestamp_expectation *)get_test_case_parameters(test); + + timestamp.tv_sec = get_32bit_time(test_data); + ext4_decode_extra_time(×tamp, + cpu_to_le32(test_data->extra_bits)); + + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, + test_data->expected.tv_sec, + timestamp.tv_sec, + CASE_NAME_FORMAT, + test_data->test_case_name, + test_data->msb_set, + test_data->lower_bound, + test_data->extra_bits); + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, + test_data->expected.tv_nsec, + timestamp.tv_nsec, + CASE_NAME_FORMAT, + test_data->test_case_name, + test_data->msb_set, + test_data->lower_bound, + test_data->extra_bits); +} + +struct timestamp_expectation *get_test_parameters(void) +{ + static struct timestamp_expectation test_data[] = { { .test_case_name = LOWER_BOUND_NEG_NO_EXTRA_BITS_CASE, .msb_set = true, @@ -231,36 +262,13 @@ static void inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding(struct kunit *test) .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x37fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, } }; - - struct timespec64 timestamp; - int i; - - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(test_data); ++i) { - timestamp.tv_sec = get_32bit_time(&test_data[i]); - ext4_decode_extra_time(×tamp, - cpu_to_le32(test_data[i].extra_bits)); - - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, - test_data[i].expected.tv_sec, - timestamp.tv_sec, - CASE_NAME_FORMAT, - test_data[i].test_case_name, - test_data[i].msb_set, - test_data[i].lower_bound, - test_data[i].extra_bits); - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, - test_data[i].expected.tv_nsec, - timestamp.tv_nsec, - CASE_NAME_FORMAT, - test_data[i].test_case_name, - test_data[i].msb_set, - test_data[i].lower_bound, - test_data[i].extra_bits); - } + return test_data; }
static struct kunit_case ext4_inode_test_cases[] = { - KUNIT_CASE(inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding), + KUNIT_CASE_PARAM(inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding, + get_test_parameters, NUMBER_OF_TESTCASES, + sizeof(struct timestamp_expectation)), {} };
Hi Arpitha,
Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
[auto build test WARNING on ext4/dev] [also build test WARNING on linus/master v5.9-rc8 next-20201009] [cannot apply to tytso-fscrypt/master] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Arpitha-Raghunandan/kunit-Support-f... base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git dev config: arm-randconfig-r031-20201011 (attached as .config) compiler: clang version 12.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 9b5b3050237db3642ed7ab1bdb3ffa2202511b99) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross # install arm cross compiling tool for clang build # apt-get install binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/0cd253a8f2af3fd4e88c9ec8d7327bb26302... git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux git fetch --no-tags linux-review Arpitha-Raghunandan/kunit-Support-for-Parameterized-Testing/20201011-051918 git checkout 0cd253a8f2af3fd4e88c9ec8d7327bb26302c1da # save the attached .config to linux build tree COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross ARCH=arm
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate Reported-by: kernel test robot lkp@intel.com
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
fs/ext4/inode-test.c:133:31: warning: no previous prototype for function 'get_test_parameters' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
struct timestamp_expectation *get_test_parameters(void) ^ fs/ext4/inode-test.c:133:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit struct timestamp_expectation *get_test_parameters(void) ^ static 1 warning generated.
vim +/get_test_parameters +133 fs/ext4/inode-test.c
132
133 struct timestamp_expectation *get_test_parameters(void)
134 { 135 static struct timestamp_expectation test_data[] = { 136 { 137 .test_case_name = LOWER_BOUND_NEG_NO_EXTRA_BITS_CASE, 138 .msb_set = true, 139 .lower_bound = true, 140 .extra_bits = 0, 141 .expected = {.tv_sec = -0x80000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 142 }, 143 144 { 145 .test_case_name = UPPER_BOUND_NEG_NO_EXTRA_BITS_CASE, 146 .msb_set = true, 147 .lower_bound = false, 148 .extra_bits = 0, 149 .expected = {.tv_sec = -1LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 150 }, 151 152 { 153 .test_case_name = LOWER_BOUND_NONNEG_NO_EXTRA_BITS_CASE, 154 .msb_set = false, 155 .lower_bound = true, 156 .extra_bits = 0, 157 .expected = {0LL, 0L}, 158 }, 159 160 { 161 .test_case_name = UPPER_BOUND_NONNEG_NO_EXTRA_BITS_CASE, 162 .msb_set = false, 163 .lower_bound = false, 164 .extra_bits = 0, 165 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x7fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 166 }, 167 168 { 169 .test_case_name = LOWER_BOUND_NEG_LO_1_CASE, 170 .msb_set = true, 171 .lower_bound = true, 172 .extra_bits = 1, 173 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x80000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 174 }, 175 176 { 177 .test_case_name = UPPER_BOUND_NEG_LO_1_CASE, 178 .msb_set = true, 179 .lower_bound = false, 180 .extra_bits = 1, 181 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0xffffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 182 }, 183 184 { 185 .test_case_name = LOWER_BOUND_NONNEG_LO_1_CASE, 186 .msb_set = false, 187 .lower_bound = true, 188 .extra_bits = 1, 189 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x100000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 190 }, 191 192 { 193 .test_case_name = UPPER_BOUND_NONNEG_LO_1_CASE, 194 .msb_set = false, 195 .lower_bound = false, 196 .extra_bits = 1, 197 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x17fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 198 }, 199 200 { 201 .test_case_name = LOWER_BOUND_NEG_HI_1_CASE, 202 .msb_set = true, 203 .lower_bound = true, 204 .extra_bits = 2, 205 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x180000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 206 }, 207 208 { 209 .test_case_name = UPPER_BOUND_NEG_HI_1_CASE, 210 .msb_set = true, 211 .lower_bound = false, 212 .extra_bits = 2, 213 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x1ffffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 214 }, 215 216 { 217 .test_case_name = LOWER_BOUND_NONNEG_HI_1_CASE, 218 .msb_set = false, 219 .lower_bound = true, 220 .extra_bits = 2, 221 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x200000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 222 }, 223 224 { 225 .test_case_name = UPPER_BOUND_NONNEG_HI_1_CASE, 226 .msb_set = false, 227 .lower_bound = false, 228 .extra_bits = 2, 229 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x27fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 230 }, 231 232 { 233 .test_case_name = UPPER_BOUND_NONNEG_HI_1_NS_1_CASE, 234 .msb_set = false, 235 .lower_bound = false, 236 .extra_bits = 6, 237 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x27fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 1L}, 238 }, 239 240 { 241 .test_case_name = LOWER_BOUND_NONNEG_HI_1_NS_MAX_CASE, 242 .msb_set = false, 243 .lower_bound = true, 244 .extra_bits = 0xFFFFFFFF, 245 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x300000000LL, 246 .tv_nsec = MAX_NANOSECONDS}, 247 }, 248 249 { 250 .test_case_name = LOWER_BOUND_NONNEG_EXTRA_BITS_1_CASE, 251 .msb_set = false, 252 .lower_bound = true, 253 .extra_bits = 3, 254 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x300000000LL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 255 }, 256 257 { 258 .test_case_name = UPPER_BOUND_NONNEG_EXTRA_BITS_1_CASE, 259 .msb_set = false, 260 .lower_bound = false, 261 .extra_bits = 3, 262 .expected = {.tv_sec = 0x37fffffffLL, .tv_nsec = 0L}, 263 } 264 }; 265 return test_data; 266 } 267
--- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org
On Sat, 10 Oct 2020 at 16:54, Arpitha Raghunandan 98.arpi@gmail.com wrote:
Implementation of support for parameterized testing in KUnit.
Signed-off-by: Arpitha Raghunandan 98.arpi@gmail.com
include/kunit/test.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ lib/kunit/test.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h index 59f3144f009a..4740d66269b4 100644 --- a/include/kunit/test.h +++ b/include/kunit/test.h @@ -140,10 +140,14 @@ struct kunit; struct kunit_case { void (*run_case)(struct kunit *test); const char *name;
void* (*get_params)(void);
int max_parameters_count;
int parameter_size; /* private: internal use only. */ bool success; char *log;
bool parameterized;
Why do you need this bool? Doesn't get_params being non-NULL tell you if the test case is parameterized?
};
static inline char *kunit_status_to_string(bool status) @@ -162,6 +166,11 @@ static inline char *kunit_status_to_string(bool status) */ #define KUNIT_CASE(test_name) { .run_case = test_name, .name = #test_name }
+#define KUNIT_CASE_PARAM(test_name, getparams, count, size) \
{ .run_case = test_name, .name = #test_name, \
.parameterized = true, .get_params = (void* (*)(void))getparams, \
.max_parameters_count = count, .parameter_size = size }
I think this interface is overly complex. For one, if the only purpose of the getparams function is to return a pointer to some array, then there are only few cases where I see getparams being a function could be useful.
Instead, could we make the getparams function behave like a generator? Because then you do not need count, nor size. Its function signature would be:
void* (*generate_params)(void* prev_param);
The protocol would be:
- The first call to generate_params is passed prev_param of NULL, and returns a pointer to the first parameter P[0].
- Every nth successive call to generate_params is passed the previous parameter P[n-1].
- When no more parameters are available, generate_params returns NULL.
- (generate_params should otherwise be stateless, but this is only relevant if concurrent calls are expected.)
/**
- struct kunit_suite - describes a related collection of &struct kunit_case
@@ -206,6 +215,23 @@ struct kunit { /* private: internal use only. */ const char *name; /* Read only after initialization! */ char *log; /* Points at case log after initialization */
bool parameterized; /* True for parameterized tests */
/* param_values stores the test parameters
* for parameterized tests.
*/
void *param_values;
/* max_parameters_count indicates maximum number of
* parameters for parameterized tests.
*/
int max_parameters_count;
/* iterator_count is used by the iterator method
* for parameterized tests.
*/
int iterator_count;
/* parameter_size indicates size of a single test case
* for parameterized tests.
*/
int parameter_size;
All of this would become much simpler if you used the generator approach. Likely only 1 field would be required, which is the current param.
struct kunit_try_catch try_catch; /* * success starts as true, and may only be set to false during a
@@ -225,6 +251,7 @@ struct kunit { };
void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log); +void kunit_init_param_test(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_case *test_case);
int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite);
@@ -237,6 +264,8 @@ int __kunit_test_suites_init(struct kunit_suite **suites);
void __kunit_test_suites_exit(struct kunit_suite **suites);
+void *get_test_case_parameters(struct kunit *test);
/**
- kunit_test_suites() - used to register one or more &struct kunit_suite
with KUnit.
diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c index c36037200310..ab9e13c81d4a 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c @@ -142,6 +142,11 @@ unsigned int kunit_test_case_num(struct kunit_suite *suite, } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_test_case_num);
+static void kunit_print_failed_param(struct kunit *test) +{
kunit_err(test, "\n\tTest failed at parameter: %d\n", test->iterator_count);
+}
static void kunit_print_string_stream(struct kunit *test, struct string_stream *stream) { @@ -182,6 +187,9 @@ static void kunit_fail(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_assert *assert)
assert->format(assert, stream);
if (test->parameterized)
kunit_print_failed_param(test);
kunit_print_string_stream(test, stream); WARN_ON(string_stream_destroy(stream));
@@ -236,6 +244,18 @@ void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_init_test);
+void kunit_init_param_test(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_case *test_case) +{
spin_lock_init(&test->lock);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&test->resources);
test->parameterized = true;
test->param_values = (void *)(test_case->get_params());
test->max_parameters_count = test_case->max_parameters_count;
test->parameter_size = test_case->parameter_size;
test->iterator_count = 0;
+} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_init_param_test);
/*
- Initializes and runs test case. Does not clean up or do post validations.
*/ @@ -254,7 +274,14 @@ static void kunit_run_case_internal(struct kunit *test, } }
test_case->run_case(test);
if (!test->parameterized) {
test_case->run_case(test);
} else {
int i;
for (i = 0; i < test->max_parameters_count; i++)
test_case->run_case(test);
With a generator approach, here you'd call generate_params. Most likely, you'll need to stash its result somewhere, e.g. test->param, so it can be retrieved by the test case.
}
}
static void kunit_case_internal_cleanup(struct kunit *test) @@ -343,6 +370,8 @@ static void kunit_run_case_catch_errors(struct kunit_suite *suite, struct kunit test;
kunit_init_test(&test, test_case->name, test_case->log);
if (test_case->parameterized)
kunit_init_param_test(&test, test_case); try_catch = &test.try_catch; kunit_try_catch_init(try_catch,
@@ -407,6 +436,19 @@ void __kunit_test_suites_exit(struct kunit_suite **suites) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__kunit_test_suites_exit);
+/*
- Iterator method for the parameterized test cases
- */
+void *get_test_case_parameters(struct kunit *test) +{
int index = test->iterator_count * test->parameter_size;
if (test->iterator_count != test->max_parameters_count)
test->iterator_count++;
This is quite confusing, because if get_test_case_parameters is called multiple times within the same test case, we'll iterate through all the test case params in the same test case? I think this function should not have side-effects (like normal getters).
But if you use the generator approach, you'll likely not need this function anyway.
return (test->param_values + index);
Braces not needed.
+} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(get_test_case_parameters);
/*
- Used for static resources and when a kunit_resource * has been created by
- kunit_alloc_resource(). When an init function is supplied, @data is passed
-- 2.25.1
On 12/10/20 4:30 pm, Marco Elver wrote:
On Sat, 10 Oct 2020 at 16:54, Arpitha Raghunandan 98.arpi@gmail.com wrote:
Implementation of support for parameterized testing in KUnit.
Signed-off-by: Arpitha Raghunandan 98.arpi@gmail.com
include/kunit/test.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ lib/kunit/test.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h index 59f3144f009a..4740d66269b4 100644 --- a/include/kunit/test.h +++ b/include/kunit/test.h @@ -140,10 +140,14 @@ struct kunit; struct kunit_case { void (*run_case)(struct kunit *test); const char *name;
void* (*get_params)(void);
int max_parameters_count;
int parameter_size; /* private: internal use only. */ bool success; char *log;
bool parameterized;
Why do you need this bool? Doesn't get_params being non-NULL tell you if the test case is parameterized? Yeah, this will.
};
static inline char *kunit_status_to_string(bool status) @@ -162,6 +166,11 @@ static inline char *kunit_status_to_string(bool status) */ #define KUNIT_CASE(test_name) { .run_case = test_name, .name = #test_name }
+#define KUNIT_CASE_PARAM(test_name, getparams, count, size) \
{ .run_case = test_name, .name = #test_name, \
.parameterized = true, .get_params = (void* (*)(void))getparams, \
.max_parameters_count = count, .parameter_size = size }
I think this interface is overly complex. For one, if the only purpose of the getparams function is to return a pointer to some array, then there are only few cases where I see getparams being a function could be useful.
Instead, could we make the getparams function behave like a generator? Because then you do not need count, nor size. Its function signature would be:
void* (*generate_params)(void* prev_param);
The protocol would be:
- The first call to generate_params is passed prev_param of NULL, and
returns a pointer to the first parameter P[0].
- Every nth successive call to generate_params is passed the previous
parameter P[n-1].
When no more parameters are available, generate_params returns NULL.
(generate_params should otherwise be stateless, but this is only
relevant if concurrent calls are expected.)
/**
- struct kunit_suite - describes a related collection of &struct kunit_case
@@ -206,6 +215,23 @@ struct kunit { /* private: internal use only. */ const char *name; /* Read only after initialization! */ char *log; /* Points at case log after initialization */
bool parameterized; /* True for parameterized tests */
/* param_values stores the test parameters
* for parameterized tests.
*/
void *param_values;
/* max_parameters_count indicates maximum number of
* parameters for parameterized tests.
*/
int max_parameters_count;
/* iterator_count is used by the iterator method
* for parameterized tests.
*/
int iterator_count;
/* parameter_size indicates size of a single test case
* for parameterized tests.
*/
int parameter_size;
All of this would become much simpler if you used the generator approach. Likely only 1 field would be required, which is the current param.
struct kunit_try_catch try_catch; /* * success starts as true, and may only be set to false during a
@@ -225,6 +251,7 @@ struct kunit { };
void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log); +void kunit_init_param_test(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_case *test_case);
int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite);
@@ -237,6 +264,8 @@ int __kunit_test_suites_init(struct kunit_suite **suites);
void __kunit_test_suites_exit(struct kunit_suite **suites);
+void *get_test_case_parameters(struct kunit *test);
/**
- kunit_test_suites() - used to register one or more &struct kunit_suite
with KUnit.
diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c index c36037200310..ab9e13c81d4a 100644 --- a/lib/kunit/test.c +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c @@ -142,6 +142,11 @@ unsigned int kunit_test_case_num(struct kunit_suite *suite, } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_test_case_num);
+static void kunit_print_failed_param(struct kunit *test) +{
kunit_err(test, "\n\tTest failed at parameter: %d\n", test->iterator_count);
+}
static void kunit_print_string_stream(struct kunit *test, struct string_stream *stream) { @@ -182,6 +187,9 @@ static void kunit_fail(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_assert *assert)
assert->format(assert, stream);
if (test->parameterized)
kunit_print_failed_param(test);
kunit_print_string_stream(test, stream); WARN_ON(string_stream_destroy(stream));
@@ -236,6 +244,18 @@ void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_init_test);
+void kunit_init_param_test(struct kunit *test, struct kunit_case *test_case) +{
spin_lock_init(&test->lock);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&test->resources);
test->parameterized = true;
test->param_values = (void *)(test_case->get_params());
test->max_parameters_count = test_case->max_parameters_count;
test->parameter_size = test_case->parameter_size;
test->iterator_count = 0;
+} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_init_param_test);
/*
- Initializes and runs test case. Does not clean up or do post validations.
*/ @@ -254,7 +274,14 @@ static void kunit_run_case_internal(struct kunit *test, } }
test_case->run_case(test);
if (!test->parameterized) {
test_case->run_case(test);
} else {
int i;
for (i = 0; i < test->max_parameters_count; i++)
test_case->run_case(test);
With a generator approach, here you'd call generate_params. Most likely, you'll need to stash its result somewhere, e.g. test->param, so it can be retrieved by the test case.
}
}
static void kunit_case_internal_cleanup(struct kunit *test) @@ -343,6 +370,8 @@ static void kunit_run_case_catch_errors(struct kunit_suite *suite, struct kunit test;
kunit_init_test(&test, test_case->name, test_case->log);
if (test_case->parameterized)
kunit_init_param_test(&test, test_case); try_catch = &test.try_catch; kunit_try_catch_init(try_catch,
@@ -407,6 +436,19 @@ void __kunit_test_suites_exit(struct kunit_suite **suites) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__kunit_test_suites_exit);
+/*
- Iterator method for the parameterized test cases
- */
+void *get_test_case_parameters(struct kunit *test) +{
int index = test->iterator_count * test->parameter_size;
if (test->iterator_count != test->max_parameters_count)
test->iterator_count++;
This is quite confusing, because if get_test_case_parameters is called multiple times within the same test case, we'll iterate through all the test case params in the same test case? I think this function should not have side-effects (like normal getters).
But if you use the generator approach, you'll likely not need this function anyway.
The generator approach sounds good. I will work on it for the next version.
return (test->param_values + index);
Braces not needed.
I will fix this.
+} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(get_test_case_parameters);
/*
- Used for static resources and when a kunit_resource * has been created by
- kunit_alloc_resource(). When an init function is supplied, @data is passed
-- 2.25.1
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org