From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kieran Bingham Subject: Re: [RFC v3 14/19] Documentation: kunit: add documentation for KUnit Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:16:08 +0000 Message-ID: <57c3dc86-236f-e981-249a-8bbfe5c19f0e@ideasonboard.com> References: <20181128193636.254378-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20181128193636.254378-15-brendanhiggins@google.com> <20181130034525.GP18410@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com> <0927c42a-8e65-f410-e6ed-27576572577f@ideasonboard.com> Reply-To: kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-GB Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Brendan Higgins Cc: Luis Chamberlain , Greg KH , Kees Cook , shuah@kernel.org, Joel Stanley , mpe@ellerman.id.au, joe@perches.com, brakmo@fb.com, Steven Rostedt , Tim.Bird@sony.com, khilman@baylibre.com, Julia Lawall , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , jdike@addtoit.com, richard@nod.at, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, Daniel Vetter , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Rob Herring , dan.j.williams@intel.com, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, Frank Rowand , Knut Omang , Felix Guo List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Hi Brendan, On 09/02/2019 00:56, Brendan Higgins wrote: > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:16 AM Kieran Bingham > wrote: >> >> Hi Brendan, >> >> On 03/12/2018 23:53, Brendan Higgins wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:45 PM Luis Chamberlain wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 01:56:37PM +0000, Kieran Bingham wrote: >>>>> Hi Brendan, >>>>> >>>>> Please excuse the top posting, but I'm replying here as I'm following >>>>> the section "Creating a kunitconfig" in Documentation/kunit/start.rst. >>>>> >>>>> Could the three line kunitconfig file live under say >>>>> arch/um/configs/kunit_defconfig? >> >> >> Further consideration to this topic - I mentioned putting it in >> arch/um/configs >> >> - but I think this is wrong. >> >> We now have a location for config-fragments, which is essentially what >> this is, under kernel/configs >> >> So perhaps an addition as : >> >> kernel/configs/kunit.config >> >> Would be more appropriate - and less (UM) architecture specific. > > Sorry for the long radio silence. > > I just got around to doing this and I found that there are some > configs that are desirable to have when running KUnit under x86 in a > VM, but not UML. Should this behaviour you mention be handled by the KCONFIG depends flags? depends on (KUMIT & UML) or depends on (KUNIT & !UML) or such? An example of which configs you are referring to would help to understand the issue perhaps. > So should we have one that goes in with > config-fragments and others that go into architectures? Another idea, > it would be nice to have a KUnit config that runs all known tests This might also be a config option added to the tests directly like COMPILE_TEST perhaps? (Not sure what that would be called though ... KUNIT_RUNTIME_TEST?) I think that might be more maintainable as otherwise each new test would have to modify the {min,def}{config,fragment} ... > (this probably won't work in practice once we start testing mutually > exclusive things or things with lots of ifdeffery, but it probably > something we should try to maintain as best as we can?); this probably > shouldn't go in with the fragments, right? Sounds like we agree there :) > > I will be sending another revision out soon, but I figured I might be > able to catch you before I did so. Thanks for thinking of me. I hope I managed to reply in time to help and not hinder your progress. -- Regards -- Kieran