Consider this attempt to run KUnit in QEMU: $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --arch=x86
Before you'd get this error message: kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch
After: kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch, options are ['alpha', 'arm', 'arm64', 'i386', 'powerpc', 'riscv', 's390', 'sparc', 'x86_64']
This should make it a bit easier for people to notice when they make typos, etc. Currently, one would have to dive into the python code to figure out what the valid set is.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov dlatypov@google.com --- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 5 +++-- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 4 ++++ 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py index 1870e75ff153..a6b3cee3f0d0 100644 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py @@ -198,8 +198,9 @@ def get_source_tree_ops(arch: str, cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> LinuxSourceT return LinuxSourceTreeOperationsUml(cross_compile=cross_compile) elif os.path.isfile(config_path): return get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path, cross_compile)[1] - else: - raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch') + + options = [f[:-3] for f in os.listdir(QEMU_CONFIGS_DIR) if f.endswith('.py')] + raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch, options are ' + str(sorted(options)))
def get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path: str, cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> Tuple[ diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py index cad37a98e599..2ae72f04cbe0 100755 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py @@ -289,6 +289,10 @@ class LinuxSourceTreeTest(unittest.TestCase): pass kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir)
+ def test_invalid_arch(self): + with self.assertRaisesRegex(kunit_kernel.ConfigError, 'not a valid arch, options are.*x86_64'): + kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', arch='invalid') + # TODO: add more test cases.
base-commit: 865a0a8025ee0b54d1cc74834c57197d184a441e
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:26 AM Daniel Latypov dlatypov@google.com wrote:
Consider this attempt to run KUnit in QEMU: $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --arch=x86
Before you'd get this error message: kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch
After: kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch, options are ['alpha', 'arm', 'arm64', 'i386', 'powerpc', 'riscv', 's390', 'sparc', 'x86_64']
This should make it a bit easier for people to notice when they make typos, etc. Currently, one would have to dive into the python code to figure out what the valid set is.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov dlatypov@google.com
This is really nice, particularly given that we've had to reproduce that list in lots of talks, documentation, etc. and it could get out-of-date.
Reviewed-by: David Gow davidgow@google.com
[FYI: this didn't seem to apply cleanly to kselftest/kunit head, but it was a pretty minor issue with kunit_tool_test.py.]
Thanks, -- David
tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 5 +++-- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 4 ++++ 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py index 1870e75ff153..a6b3cee3f0d0 100644 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py @@ -198,8 +198,9 @@ def get_source_tree_ops(arch: str, cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> LinuxSourceT return LinuxSourceTreeOperationsUml(cross_compile=cross_compile) elif os.path.isfile(config_path): return get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path, cross_compile)[1]
else:raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch')
options = [f[:-3] for f in os.listdir(QEMU_CONFIGS_DIR) if f.endswith('.py')]raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch, options are ' + str(sorted(options)))def get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path: str, cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> Tuple[ diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py index cad37a98e599..2ae72f04cbe0 100755 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py @@ -289,6 +289,10 @@ class LinuxSourceTreeTest(unittest.TestCase): pass kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir)
def test_invalid_arch(self):with self.assertRaisesRegex(kunit_kernel.ConfigError, 'not a valid arch, options are.*x86_64'):kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', arch='invalid')# TODO: add more test cases.base-commit: 865a0a8025ee0b54d1cc74834c57197d184a441e
2.33.0.685.g46640cef36-goog
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 5:23 PM David Gow davidgow@google.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 7:26 AM Daniel Latypov dlatypov@google.com wrote:
Consider this attempt to run KUnit in QEMU: $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --arch=x86
Before you'd get this error message: kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch
After: kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch, options are ['alpha', 'arm', 'arm64', 'i386', 'powerpc', 'riscv', 's390', 'sparc', 'x86_64']
This should make it a bit easier for people to notice when they make typos, etc. Currently, one would have to dive into the python code to figure out what the valid set is.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov dlatypov@google.com
This is really nice, particularly given that we've had to reproduce that list in lots of talks, documentation, etc. and it could get out-of-date.
Reviewed-by: David Gow davidgow@google.com
[FYI: this didn't seem to apply cleanly to kselftest/kunit head, but it was a pretty minor issue with kunit_tool_test.py.]
Oh, this is on top of https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20210928221111.1162779-1-dlatypov@go...
I guess this line there - tree = kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir) + kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir) tripped things up a bit.
Thanks, -- David
tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 5 +++-- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 4 ++++ 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py index 1870e75ff153..a6b3cee3f0d0 100644 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py @@ -198,8 +198,9 @@ def get_source_tree_ops(arch: str, cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> LinuxSourceT return LinuxSourceTreeOperationsUml(cross_compile=cross_compile) elif os.path.isfile(config_path): return get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path, cross_compile)[1]
else:raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch')
options = [f[:-3] for f in os.listdir(QEMU_CONFIGS_DIR) if f.endswith('.py')]raise ConfigError(arch + ' is not a valid arch, options are ' + str(sorted(options)))def get_source_tree_ops_from_qemu_config(config_path: str, cross_compile: Optional[str]) -> Tuple[ diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py index cad37a98e599..2ae72f04cbe0 100755 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py @@ -289,6 +289,10 @@ class LinuxSourceTreeTest(unittest.TestCase): pass kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', kunitconfig_path=dir)
def test_invalid_arch(self):with self.assertRaisesRegex(kunit_kernel.ConfigError, 'not a valid arch, options are.*x86_64'):kunit_kernel.LinuxSourceTree('', arch='invalid')# TODO: add more test cases.base-commit: 865a0a8025ee0b54d1cc74834c57197d184a441e
2.33.0.685.g46640cef36-goog
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 4:26 PM Daniel Latypov dlatypov@google.com wrote:
Consider this attempt to run KUnit in QEMU: $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --arch=x86
Before you'd get this error message: kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch
After: kunit_kernel.ConfigError: x86 is not a valid arch, options are ['alpha', 'arm', 'arm64', 'i386', 'powerpc', 'riscv', 's390', 'sparc', 'x86_64']
This should make it a bit easier for people to notice when they make typos, etc. Currently, one would have to dive into the python code to figure out what the valid set is.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov dlatypov@google.com
Yes! Thank you for fixing this!
Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins brendanhiggins@google.com
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Brendan Higgins -
Daniel Latypov -
David Gow