From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luis Chamberlain Subject: Re: [RFC v3 01/19] kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 19:02:15 -0800 Message-ID: <20181201030215.GJ28501@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com> References: <20181128193636.254378-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20181128193636.254378-2-brendanhiggins@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181128193636.254378-2-brendanhiggins@google.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Brendan Higgins Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, keescook@google.com, shuah@kernel.org, joel@jms.id.au, mpe@ellerman.id.au, joe@perches.com, brakmo@fb.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, Tim.Bird@sony.com, khilman@baylibre.com, julia.lawall@lip6.fr, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jdike@addtoit.com, richard@nod.at, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, daniel@ffwll.ch, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, robh@kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com, frowand.list@gmail.com, knut.omang@oracle.com, Petr Mladek , alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:36:18AM -0800, Brendan Higgins wrote: > +int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_module *module) > +{ > + bool all_passed = true, success; > + struct kunit_case *test_case; > + struct kunit test; > + int ret; > + > + ret = kunit_init_test(&test, module->name); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + for (test_case = module->test_cases; test_case->run_case; test_case++) { > + success = kunit_run_case(&test, module, test_case); We are running test cases serially, why not address testing asynchronously, this way tests can also be paralellized when possible, therefore decreasing test time even further. Would that mess up the printing/log stuff somehow? Luis