From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D9FEC04A6B for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 02:18:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E0182173C for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 02:18:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="IdWnqVyk" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726503AbfEICSg (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 May 2019 22:18:36 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f194.google.com ([209.85.214.194]:38658 "EHLO mail-pl1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725842AbfEICSf (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 May 2019 22:18:35 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f194.google.com with SMTP id a59so327955pla.5; Wed, 08 May 2019 19:18:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=67cKgHpKn5BasI4H9G5b29AFH8V2LHpBqBhNNX7AepI=; b=IdWnqVyky2mloPBWQLjQqC3RNWwopYAaMClPvfqRz+kOE5FYbiQV2HYTeaz5LcNXRc 7wOeWEeAayPUpVKD8GVgH5tlHGjOMXoHfdDjtYENRb51HqJzXvqoIVPN/c8gSgI1A8Bd 27sn+YVD+VXjElLK8ki7xOEob0TJCp6WvbCU+Rl8BL3/htDMfD8jdKzGUvRX6k4w7lc7 Pf0CP6YbTC4sS274CsPgsIalQHztO9A4EhBK4Z9Lb7TnlcPn29QL3JvNlnhzeK+xhVUQ HL6MkDTHh/MTo81DfiP0Voc8IagpScTcOZUNMy2+isvaJF7gRho5CMGYBOrvWGSA9sL6 4Tqw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=67cKgHpKn5BasI4H9G5b29AFH8V2LHpBqBhNNX7AepI=; b=rU5xxhg28CX4dohbXqqjMfNojO3iyfcG9Oe35Dz4Dv/IaUXM21z07xLY+ZBti6C+ib 83AzCqjoPsbmWD1TcaN+edxIWxWJ1a7sSgOcaf+4Tynw3dLYD2P+kUzavwfhl26qunk/ mUACrmRqm7+8KISD2a1LD/dE7sZi53CIrH9KNS2D8/QaBm+kTITf2+UzxDewXoKzeJ2s u3maC3jM4XRNsEQz7y6Ycb3S0B6W9WHndP1Wuf3dwoU0Ne3DaAiCUXi2tQpeH7jzy65I aWiUaywc+diGqndfXRUKN4RN+58IfQgy1ejuniKSKaSuBS1ULI3I1kFIQmMAOXiaswkC mL6Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVoyLV8NN0limvx4XOX+p/huq9SZOgKcF6VonI9xPrWEeKuqt3n UTkvOQWbjH/zRpvotEAIHPA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxKONkqpvysOzcXsSL0stE2Fx1k07GjyXCU+F00vWxsMMPMatYsdoa5bWbRlxy93rTIbJhz0w== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8f82:: with SMTP id z2mr1716364plo.51.1557368314774; Wed, 08 May 2019 19:18:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.70] (c-24-6-192-50.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.6.192.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r138sm777868pfr.2.2019.05.08.19.18.31 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 May 2019 19:18:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework To: Theodore Ts'o , Greg KH , Brendan Higgins , keescook@google.com, kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com, mcgrof@kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, sboyd@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com, Tim.Bird@sony.com, amir73il@gmail.com, dan.carpenter@oracle.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, daniel@ffwll.ch, jdike@addtoit.com, joel@jms.id.au, julia.lawall@lip6.fr, khilman@baylibre.com, knut.omang@oracle.com, logang@deltatee.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, pmladek@suse.com, richard@nod.at, rientjes@google.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, wfg@linux.intel.com References: <20190501230126.229218-1-brendanhiggins@google.com> <54940124-50df-16ec-1a32-ad794ee05da7@gmail.com> <20190507080119.GB28121@kroah.com> <20190507172256.GB5900@mit.edu> <4d963cdc-1cbb-35a3-292c-552f865ed1f7@gmail.com> <20190509014407.GA7031@mit.edu> From: Frank Rowand Message-ID: <458dcb03-8dee-a005-97e1-7296a9e5bbfd@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 19:18:30 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190509014407.GA7031@mit.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On 5/8/19 6:44 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 05:58:49PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote: >> >> If KUnit is added to the kernel, and a subsystem that I am submitting >> code for has chosen to use KUnit instead of kselftest, then yes, I do >> *have* to use KUnit if my submission needs to contain a test for the >> code unless I want to convince the maintainer that somehow my case >> is special and I prefer to use kselftest instead of KUnittest. > > That's going to be between you and the maintainer. Today, if you want > to submit a substantive change to xfs or ext4, you're going to be > asked to create test for that new feature using xfstests. It doesn't > matter that xfstests isn't in the kernel --- if that's what is > required by the maintainer. Yes, that is exactly what I was saying. Please do not cut the pertinent parts of context that I am replying to. >>> supposed to be a simple way to run a large number of small tests that >>> for specific small components in a system. >> >> kselftest also supports running a subset of tests. That subset of tests >> can also be a large number of small tests. There is nothing inherent >> in KUnit vs kselftest in this regard, as far as I am aware. > The big difference is that kselftests are driven by a C program that > runs in userspace. Take a look at tools/testing/selftests/filesystem/dnotify_test.c > it has a main(int argc, char *argv) function. > > In contrast, KUnit are fragments of C code which run in the kernel; > not in userspace. This allows us to test internal functions inside > complex file system (such as the block allocator in ext4) directly. > This makes it *fundamentally* different from kselftest. No, totally incorrect. kselftests also supports in kernel modules as I mention in another reply to this patch. This is talking past each other a little bit, because your next reply is a reply to my email about modules. -Frank > > Cheers, > > - Ted >