Re: [PATCH v1 6/7] kunit: Add 'kunit_shutdown' option

[Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>]

Quoting Brendan Higgins (2020-01-27 23:20:01)
> From: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> 
> Add a new kernel command-line option, 'kunit_shutdown', which allows the
> user to specify that the kernel poweroff, halt, or reboot after
> completing all KUnit tests; this is very handy for running KUnit tests
> on UML or a VM so that the UML/VM process exits cleanly immediately
> after running all tests without needing a special initramfs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
> ---

Two nitpicks below

Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>

> diff --git a/lib/kunit/executor.c b/lib/kunit/executor.c
> index 7fd16feff157e..d3ec1265a72fd 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/executor.c
> +++ b/lib/kunit/executor.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
>  // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>  
>  #include <kunit/test.h>
> +#include <linux/reboot.h>

Should this include come before kunit/test.h? I imagine the order of
includes would be linux, kunit, local?

>  
>  /*
>   * These symbols point to the .kunit_test_suites section and are defined in
> @@ -11,6 +12,23 @@ extern struct kunit_suite * const * const __kunit_suites_end[];
>  
>  #if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_KUNIT)
>  
> +static char *kunit_shutdown;
> +core_param(kunit_shutdown, kunit_shutdown, charp, 0644);
> +
> +static void kunit_handle_shutdown(void)
> +{
> +       if (!kunit_shutdown)
> +               return;
> +
> +       if (!strcmp(kunit_shutdown, "poweroff")) {
> +               kernel_power_off();
> +       } else if (!strcmp(kunit_shutdown, "halt")) {
> +               kernel_halt();
> +       } else if (!strcmp(kunit_shutdown, "reboot")) {
> +               kernel_restart(NULL);
> +       }

Kernel style would be to not have braces on single line if statements.

> +}
> +
>  static void kunit_print_tap_header(void)
>  {
>         struct kunit_suite * const * const *suites, * const *subsuite;