[PATCH v3 00/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework

[PATCH v3 00/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Currently testing of userspace and in-kernel API use two different
frameworks. kselftests for the userspace ones and Kunit for the
in-kernel ones. Besides their different scopes, both have different
strengths and limitations:

Kunit:
* Tests are normal kernel code.
* They use the regular kernel toolchain.
* They can be packaged and distributed as modules conveniently.

Kselftests:
* Tests are normal userspace code
* They need a userspace toolchain.
  A kernel cross toolchain is likely not enough.
* A fair amout of userland is required to run the tests,
  which means a full distro or handcrafted rootfs.
* There is no way to conveniently package and run kselftests with a
  given kernel image.
* The kselftests makefiles are not as powerful as regular kbuild.
  For example they are missing proper header dependency tracking or more
  complex compiler option modifications.

Therefore kunit is much easier to run against different kernel
configurations and architectures.
This series aims to combine kselftests and kunit, avoiding both their
limitations. It works by compiling the userspace kselftests as part of
the regular kernel build, embedding them into the kunit kernel or module
and executing them from there. If the kernel toolchain is not fit to
produce userspace because of a missing libc, the kernel's own nolibc can
be used instead.
The structured TAP output from the kselftest is integrated into the
kunit KTAP output transparently, the kunit parser can parse the combined
logs together.

Further room for improvements:
* Call each test in its completely dedicated namespace
* Handle additional test files besides the test executable through
  archives. CPIO, cramfs, etc.
* Compatibility with kselftest_harness.h (in progress)
* Expose the blobs in debugfs
* Provide some convience wrappers around compat userprogs
* Figure out a migration path/coexistence solution for
  kunit UAPI and tools/testing/selftests/

Output from the kunit example testcase, note the output of
"example_uapi_tests".

$ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --kunitconfig lib/kunit example
...
Running tests with:
$ .kunit/linux kunit.filter_glob=example kunit.enable=1 mem=1G console=tty kunit_shutdown=halt
[11:53:53] ================== example (10 subtests) ===================
[11:53:53] [PASSED] example_simple_test
[11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example_skip_test
[11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example_mark_skipped_test
[11:53:53] [PASSED] example_all_expect_macros_test
[11:53:53] [PASSED] example_static_stub_test
[11:53:53] [PASSED] example_static_stub_using_fn_ptr_test
[11:53:53] [PASSED] example_priv_test
[11:53:53] =================== example_params_test  ===================
[11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example value 3
[11:53:53] [PASSED] example value 2
[11:53:53] [PASSED] example value 1
[11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example value 0
[11:53:53] =============== [PASSED] example_params_test ===============
[11:53:53] [PASSED] example_slow_test
[11:53:53] ======================= (4 subtests) =======================
[11:53:53] [PASSED] procfs
[11:53:53] [PASSED] userspace test 2
[11:53:53] [SKIPPED] userspace test 3: some reason
[11:53:53] [PASSED] userspace test 4
[11:53:53] ================ [PASSED] example_uapi_test ================
[11:53:53] ===================== [PASSED] example =====================
[11:53:53] ============================================================
[11:53:53] Testing complete. Ran 16 tests: passed: 11, skipped: 5
[11:53:53] Elapsed time: 67.543s total, 1.823s configuring, 65.655s building, 0.058s running

Based on v6.15-rc1.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
Changes in v3:
- Reintroduce CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC
- Enable CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC for m68k and SPARC
- Properly handle 'clean' target for userprogs
- Use ramfs over tmpfs to reduce dependencies
- Inherit userprogs byte order and ABI from kernel
- Drop now unnecessary "#ifndef NOLIBC"
- Pick up review tags
- Drop usage of __private in blob.h,
  sparse complains and it is not really necessary
- Fix execution on loongarch when using clang
- Drop userprogs libgcc handling, it was ugly and is not yet necessary
- Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250407-kunit-kselftests-v2-0-454114e287fd@linutronix.de

Changes in v2:
- Rebase onto v6.15-rc1
- Add documentation and kernel docs
- Resolve invalid kconfig breakages
- Drop already applied patch "kbuild: implement CONFIG_HEADERS_INSTALL for Usermode Linux"
- Drop userprogs CONFIG_WERROR integration, it doesn't need to be part of this series
- Replace patch prefix "kconfig" with "kbuild"
- Rename kunit_uapi_run_executable() to kunit_uapi_run_kselftest()
- Generate private, conflict-free symbols in the blob framework
- Handle kselftest exit codes
- Handle SIGABRT
- Forward output also to kunit debugfs log
- Install a fd=0 stdin filedescriptor
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250217-kunit-kselftests-v1-0-42b4524c3b0a@linutronix.de

---
Thomas Weißschuh (16):
      kbuild: userprogs: avoid duplicating of flags inherited from kernel
      kbuild: userprogs: also inherit byte order and ABI from kernel
      init: re-add CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC
      kbuild: userprogs: add nolibc support
      kbuild: introduce CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC
      kbuild: doc: add label for userprogs section
      kbuild: introduce blob framework
      kunit: tool: Add test for nested test result reporting
      kunit: tool: Don't overwrite test status based on subtest counts
      kunit: tool: Parse skipped tests from kselftest.h
      kunit: Always descend into kunit directory during build
      kunit: qemu_configs: loongarch: Enable LSX/LSAX
      kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework
      kunit: uapi: Add example for UAPI tests
      kunit: uapi: Introduce preinit executable
      kunit: uapi: Validate usability of /proc

 Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst        |   5 +
 Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst         |  12 +
 Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst                 |  38 ++-
 MAINTAINERS                                        |   2 +
 Makefile                                           |   7 +-
 include/kunit/uapi.h                               |  24 ++
 include/linux/blob.h                               |  31 +++
 init/Kconfig                                       |   7 +
 lib/Makefile                                       |   4 -
 lib/kunit/Kconfig                                  |  10 +
 lib/kunit/Makefile                                 |  20 +-
 lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c                     |  15 ++
 lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c                     |  54 ++++
 lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c                           |  63 +++++
 lib/kunit/uapi.c                                   | 294 +++++++++++++++++++++
 scripts/Makefile.blobs                             |  19 ++
 scripts/Makefile.build                             |   6 +
 scripts/Makefile.clean                             |   2 +-
 scripts/Makefile.userprogs                         |  13 +-
 scripts/blob-wrap.c                                |  27 ++
 tools/include/nolibc/Kconfig.nolibc                |  15 ++
 tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py                |  13 +-
 tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py             |   9 +
 tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py      |   2 +
 .../test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log         |  10 +
 .../test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log    |   3 +-
 26 files changed, 686 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: f07a3558c4a5d76f3fea004075e5151c4516d055
change-id: 20241015-kunit-kselftests-56273bc40442

Best regards,
-- 
Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>

[PATCH v3 01/16] kbuild: userprogs: avoid duplicating of flags inherited from kernel

[Thomas Weißschuh]

The duplication makes maintenance harder. Changes need to be done in two
places and the lines will grow overly long.

Use an intermediary variable instead.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 Makefile | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index 35e6e5240c61a8a329011929fcd0352b881dccdc..c4293cf91e968ca8ee64452841fb266e24df63f6 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -1130,8 +1130,9 @@ LDFLAGS_vmlinux	+= --emit-relocs --discard-none
 endif
 
 # Align the bit size of userspace programs with the kernel
-KBUILD_USERCFLAGS  += $(filter -m32 -m64 --target=%, $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
-KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS += $(filter -m32 -m64 --target=%, $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
+USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := -m32 -m64 --target=%
+KBUILD_USERCFLAGS  += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
+KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
 
 # userspace programs are linked via the compiler, use the correct linker
 ifeq ($(CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG)$(CONFIG_LD_IS_LLD),yy)

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 01/16] kbuild: userprogs: avoid duplicating of flags inherited from kernel

[Nicolas Schier]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 09:38:07AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> The duplication makes maintenance harder. Changes need to be done in two
> places and the lines will grow overly long.
> 
> Use an intermediary variable instead.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---
>  Makefile | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@avm.de>

[PATCH v3 02/16] kbuild: userprogs: also inherit byte order and ABI from kernel

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Make sure the byte order and ABI of the userprogs matches the one of the
kernel, similar to how the bit size is handled.
Otherwise the userprogs may not be executable.
This happens for example on powerpc little endian, or riscv32.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 Makefile | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index c4293cf91e968ca8ee64452841fb266e24df63f6..b9aa1058321dabd3b3dd5610e45a2807dfa257f4 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -1129,8 +1129,8 @@ ifneq ($(CONFIG_ARCH_VMLINUX_NEEDS_RELOCS),)
 LDFLAGS_vmlinux	+= --emit-relocs --discard-none
 endif
 
-# Align the bit size of userspace programs with the kernel
-USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := -m32 -m64 --target=%
+# Align the bit size, byte order and architecture of userspace programs with the kernel
+USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := -m32 -m64 -mlittle-endian -mbig-endian --target=% -march=% -mabi=%
 KBUILD_USERCFLAGS  += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
 KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
 

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 02/16] kbuild: userprogs: also inherit byte order and ABI from kernel

[Nicolas Schier]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 09:38:08AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> Make sure the byte order and ABI of the userprogs matches the one of the
> kernel, similar to how the bit size is handled.
> Otherwise the userprogs may not be executable.
> This happens for example on powerpc little endian, or riscv32.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---
>  Makefile | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@avm.de>

Re: [PATCH v3 02/16] kbuild: userprogs: also inherit byte order and ABI from kernel

[Masahiro Yamada]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:38 PM Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Make sure the byte order and ABI of the userprogs matches the one of the
> kernel, similar to how the bit size is handled.
> Otherwise the userprogs may not be executable.
> This happens for example on powerpc little endian, or riscv32.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---
>  Makefile | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> index c4293cf91e968ca8ee64452841fb266e24df63f6..b9aa1058321dabd3b3dd5610e45a2807dfa257f4 100644
> --- a/Makefile
> +++ b/Makefile
> @@ -1129,8 +1129,8 @@ ifneq ($(CONFIG_ARCH_VMLINUX_NEEDS_RELOCS),)
>  LDFLAGS_vmlinux        += --emit-relocs --discard-none
>  endif
>
> -# Align the bit size of userspace programs with the kernel
> -USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := -m32 -m64 --target=%
> +# Align the bit size, byte order and architecture of userspace programs with the kernel
> +USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := -m32 -m64 -mlittle-endian -mbig-endian --target=% -march=% -mabi=%
>  KBUILD_USERCFLAGS  += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
>  KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))


Why didn't you do like this?

USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := $(filter -m32 -m64 -mlittle-endian
-mbig-endian --target=% -march=% -mabi=%, $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS)
$(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
KBUILD_USERCFLAGS  += $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL)
KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS += $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL)



--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

Re: [PATCH v3 02/16] kbuild: userprogs: also inherit byte order and ABI from kernel

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 11:49:41PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:38 PM Thomas Weißschuh
> <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Make sure the byte order and ABI of the userprogs matches the one of the
> > kernel, similar to how the bit size is handled.
> > Otherwise the userprogs may not be executable.
> > This happens for example on powerpc little endian, or riscv32.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > ---
> >  Makefile | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> > index c4293cf91e968ca8ee64452841fb266e24df63f6..b9aa1058321dabd3b3dd5610e45a2807dfa257f4 100644
> > --- a/Makefile
> > +++ b/Makefile
> > @@ -1129,8 +1129,8 @@ ifneq ($(CONFIG_ARCH_VMLINUX_NEEDS_RELOCS),)
> >  LDFLAGS_vmlinux        += --emit-relocs --discard-none
> >  endif
> >
> > -# Align the bit size of userspace programs with the kernel
> > -USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := -m32 -m64 --target=%
> > +# Align the bit size, byte order and architecture of userspace programs with the kernel
> > +USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := -m32 -m64 -mlittle-endian -mbig-endian --target=% -march=% -mabi=%
> >  KBUILD_USERCFLAGS  += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
> >  KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
> 
> 
> Why didn't you do like this?
> 
> USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := $(filter -m32 -m64 -mlittle-endian
> -mbig-endian --target=% -march=% -mabi=%, $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS)
> $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
> KBUILD_USERCFLAGS  += $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL)
> KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS += $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL)

The idea was to keep the USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL line free of clutter, as it is
probably going to change more often. To improve reviewability and gain some
available horizontal space in case it should be needed at some point.

If you prefer the other layout I'll be happy to switch it around.


Thomas

Re: [PATCH v3 02/16] kbuild: userprogs: also inherit byte order and ABI from kernel

[Masahiro Yamada]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 4:39 PM Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 11:49:41PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:38 PM Thomas Weißschuh
> > <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > Make sure the byte order and ABI of the userprogs matches the one of the
> > > kernel, similar to how the bit size is handled.
> > > Otherwise the userprogs may not be executable.
> > > This happens for example on powerpc little endian, or riscv32.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > > ---
> > >  Makefile | 4 ++--
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> > > index c4293cf91e968ca8ee64452841fb266e24df63f6..b9aa1058321dabd3b3dd5610e45a2807dfa257f4 100644
> > > --- a/Makefile
> > > +++ b/Makefile
> > > @@ -1129,8 +1129,8 @@ ifneq ($(CONFIG_ARCH_VMLINUX_NEEDS_RELOCS),)
> > >  LDFLAGS_vmlinux        += --emit-relocs --discard-none
> > >  endif
> > >
> > > -# Align the bit size of userspace programs with the kernel
> > > -USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := -m32 -m64 --target=%
> > > +# Align the bit size, byte order and architecture of userspace programs with the kernel
> > > +USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := -m32 -m64 -mlittle-endian -mbig-endian --target=% -march=% -mabi=%
> > >  KBUILD_USERCFLAGS  += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
> > >  KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS += $(filter $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL), $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
> >
> >
> > Why didn't you do like this?
> >
> > USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL := $(filter -m32 -m64 -mlittle-endian
> > -mbig-endian --target=% -march=% -mabi=%, $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS)
> > $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))
> > KBUILD_USERCFLAGS  += $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL)
> > KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS += $(USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL)
>
> The idea was to keep the USERFLAGS_FROM_KERNEL line free of clutter, as it is
> probably going to change more often. To improve reviewability and gain some
> available horizontal space in case it should be needed at some point.
>
> If you prefer the other layout I'll be happy to switch it around.


$(filter ... $(KBUILD_CPPFLAGS) $(KBUILD_CFLAGS))

is duplicated in the two lines.

That is the reason for my suggestion.



-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

[PATCH v3 03/16] init: re-add CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC

[Thomas Weißschuh]

For the kunit UAPI functionality this feature is needed.

This reverts commit d1b99cdf22e0 ("init: remove unused CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC")

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 init/Kconfig | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig
index af4c2f0854554bbcdf193852cf5c1d2c2accc64f..26cafbad4f1560fb56b4bef31ae29baf54175661 100644
--- a/init/Kconfig
+++ b/init/Kconfig
@@ -87,6 +87,11 @@ config CC_CAN_LINK
 	default $(success,$(srctree)/scripts/cc-can-link.sh $(CC) $(CLANG_FLAGS) $(USERCFLAGS) $(USERLDFLAGS) $(m64-flag)) if 64BIT
 	default $(success,$(srctree)/scripts/cc-can-link.sh $(CC) $(CLANG_FLAGS) $(USERCFLAGS) $(USERLDFLAGS) $(m32-flag))
 
+config CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC
+	bool
+	default $(success,$(srctree)/scripts/cc-can-link.sh $(CC) $(CLANG_FLAGS) $(USERCFLAGS) $(USERLDFLAGS) $(m64-flag) -static) if 64BIT
+	default $(success,$(srctree)/scripts/cc-can-link.sh $(CC) $(CLANG_FLAGS) $(USERCFLAGS) $(USERLDFLAGS) $(m32-flag) -static)
+
 # Fixed in GCC 14, 13.3, 12.4 and 11.5
 # https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
 config GCC_ASM_GOTO_OUTPUT_BROKEN

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 03/16] init: re-add CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC

[Nicolas Schier]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 09:38:09AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> For the kunit UAPI functionality this feature is needed.
> 
> This reverts commit d1b99cdf22e0 ("init: remove unused CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---
>  init/Kconfig | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 

Acked-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@avm.de>

[PATCH v3 04/16] kbuild: userprogs: add nolibc support

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Userprogs are built with the regular kernel compiler $CC.
A kernel compiler does not necessarily contain a libc which is required
for a normal userspace application.
However the kernel tree does contain a minimal libc implementation
"nolibc" which can be used to build userspace applications.

Introduce support to build userprogs against nolibc instead of the
default libc of the compiler, which may not exist.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>

---
This could probably be moved out of the generic kbuild makefiles.
I think the ergonimics would suffer and this functionality could be
used by other users of userprogs.

Also this does currently not support out-of-tree builds.
For that tools/include/nolibc/*.h and usr/include/*.h would need to be
installed into the build directory.
---
 Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst | 13 +++++++++++++
 scripts/Makefile.userprogs         | 13 ++++++++++---
 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
index 8aef3650c1f32b6b197e0dc777e26775d371a081..4cc7a1b89f1803857a4723284613111e9ad71d92 100644
--- a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
+++ b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
@@ -974,6 +974,19 @@ When linking bpfilter_umh, it will be passed the extra option -static.
 
 From command line, :ref:`USERCFLAGS and USERLDFLAGS <userkbuildflags>` will also be used.
 
+Building userprogs against nolibc
+---------------------------------
+
+Not all kernel toolchains provide a libc.
+Simple userprogs can be built against a very simple libc call "nolibc" provided
+by the kernel source tree.
+This requires ``CONFIG_HEADERS_INSTALL=y``.
+
+Example::
+
+  # lib/kunit/Makefile
+  uapi-preinit-nolibc := $(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC)
+
 When userspace programs are actually built
 ------------------------------------------
 
diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.userprogs b/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
index f3a7e1ef3753b54303718fae97f4b3c9d4eac07c..b1633a9de6c86a023c70a717bac0b80b89d01431 100644
--- a/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
+++ b/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
@@ -16,10 +16,17 @@ user-csingle	:= $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-csingle))
 user-cmulti	:= $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-cmulti))
 user-cobjs	:= $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-cobjs))
 
+user_nolibc_ccflags := -nostdlib -nostdinc -static -fno-ident -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables \
+		      -ffreestanding -fno-stack-protector \
+		      -isystem $(objtree)/usr/include -include $(srctree)/tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h -isystem $(srctree)/tools/include/nolibc/
+user_nolibc_ldflags := -nostdlib -nostdinc -static
+
 user_ccflags	= -Wp,-MMD,$(depfile) $(KBUILD_USERCFLAGS) $(userccflags) \
-			$($(target-stem)-userccflags)
-user_ldflags	= $(KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS) $(userldflags) $($(target-stem)-userldflags)
-user_ldlibs	= $(userldlibs) $($(target-stem)-userldlibs)
+			$($(target-stem)-userccflags) $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ccflags))
+user_ldflags	= $(KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS) $(userldflags) $($(target-stem)-userldflags) \
+			$(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ldflags))
+user_ldlibs	= $(userldlibs) $($(target-stem)-userldlibs) \
+			$(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ldlibs))
 
 # Create an executable from a single .c file
 quiet_cmd_user_cc_c = CC [U]  $@

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 04/16] kbuild: userprogs: add nolibc support

[Nicolas Schier]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 09:38:10AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> Userprogs are built with the regular kernel compiler $CC.
> A kernel compiler does not necessarily contain a libc which is required
> for a normal userspace application.
> However the kernel tree does contain a minimal libc implementation
> "nolibc" which can be used to build userspace applications.
> 
> Introduce support to build userprogs against nolibc instead of the
> default libc of the compiler, which may not exist.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> 
> ---
> This could probably be moved out of the generic kbuild makefiles.
> I think the ergonimics would suffer and this functionality could be
> used by other users of userprogs.
> 
> Also this does currently not support out-of-tree builds.
> For that tools/include/nolibc/*.h and usr/include/*.h would need to be
> installed into the build directory.

Thanks!

Reviewed-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@avm.de>

Probably overkill, but might it make sense to abort *-nolibc compilation 
requests for out-of-tree builds?

Kind regards,
Nicolas

Re: [PATCH v3 04/16] kbuild: userprogs: add nolibc support

[Masahiro Yamada]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:38 PM Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Userprogs are built with the regular kernel compiler $CC.
> A kernel compiler does not necessarily contain a libc which is required
> for a normal userspace application.
> However the kernel tree does contain a minimal libc implementation
> "nolibc" which can be used to build userspace applications.
>
> Introduce support to build userprogs against nolibc instead of the
> default libc of the compiler, which may not exist.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
>
> ---
> This could probably be moved out of the generic kbuild makefiles.
> I think the ergonimics would suffer and this functionality could be
> used by other users of userprogs.
>
> Also this does currently not support out-of-tree builds.
> For that tools/include/nolibc/*.h and usr/include/*.h would need to be
> installed into the build directory.
> ---
>  Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst | 13 +++++++++++++
>  scripts/Makefile.userprogs         | 13 ++++++++++---
>  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
> index 8aef3650c1f32b6b197e0dc777e26775d371a081..4cc7a1b89f1803857a4723284613111e9ad71d92 100644
> --- a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
> @@ -974,6 +974,19 @@ When linking bpfilter_umh, it will be passed the extra option -static.
>
>  From command line, :ref:`USERCFLAGS and USERLDFLAGS <userkbuildflags>` will also be used.
>
> +Building userprogs against nolibc
> +---------------------------------
> +
> +Not all kernel toolchains provide a libc.
> +Simple userprogs can be built against a very simple libc call "nolibc" provided
> +by the kernel source tree.
> +This requires ``CONFIG_HEADERS_INSTALL=y``.
> +
> +Example::
> +
> +  # lib/kunit/Makefile
> +  uapi-preinit-nolibc := $(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC)
> +
>  When userspace programs are actually built
>  ------------------------------------------
>
> diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.userprogs b/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
> index f3a7e1ef3753b54303718fae97f4b3c9d4eac07c..b1633a9de6c86a023c70a717bac0b80b89d01431 100644
> --- a/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
> +++ b/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
> @@ -16,10 +16,17 @@ user-csingle        := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-csingle))
>  user-cmulti    := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-cmulti))
>  user-cobjs     := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-cobjs))
>
> +user_nolibc_ccflags := -nostdlib -nostdinc -static -fno-ident -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables \
> +                     -ffreestanding -fno-stack-protector \
> +                     -isystem $(objtree)/usr/include -include $(srctree)/tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h -isystem $(srctree)/tools/include/nolibc/

The tools/ directory is a different world, and Kbuild scripts do not know
anything about it.

And, you do not need to implement this in scripts/Makefile.userprogs
because you can move this to lib/kunit/Makefile.kunit-uapi or somewhere.









> +user_nolibc_ldflags := -nostdlib -nostdinc -static
> +
>  user_ccflags   = -Wp,-MMD,$(depfile) $(KBUILD_USERCFLAGS) $(userccflags) \
> -                       $($(target-stem)-userccflags)
> -user_ldflags   = $(KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS) $(userldflags) $($(target-stem)-userldflags)
> -user_ldlibs    = $(userldlibs) $($(target-stem)-userldlibs)
> +                       $($(target-stem)-userccflags) $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ccflags))
> +user_ldflags   = $(KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS) $(userldflags) $($(target-stem)-userldflags) \
> +                       $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ldflags))
> +user_ldlibs    = $(userldlibs) $($(target-stem)-userldlibs) \
> +                       $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ldlibs))
>
>  # Create an executable from a single .c file
>  quiet_cmd_user_cc_c = CC [U]  $@
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>
>


--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

Re: [PATCH v3 04/16] kbuild: userprogs: add nolibc support

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 12:35:07AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:38 PM Thomas Weißschuh
> <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Userprogs are built with the regular kernel compiler $CC.
> > A kernel compiler does not necessarily contain a libc which is required
> > for a normal userspace application.
> > However the kernel tree does contain a minimal libc implementation
> > "nolibc" which can be used to build userspace applications.
> >
> > Introduce support to build userprogs against nolibc instead of the
> > default libc of the compiler, which may not exist.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> >
> > ---
> > This could probably be moved out of the generic kbuild makefiles.
> > I think the ergonimics would suffer and this functionality could be
> > used by other users of userprogs.
> >
> > Also this does currently not support out-of-tree builds.
> > For that tools/include/nolibc/*.h and usr/include/*.h would need to be
> > installed into the build directory.

<snip>

> > --- a/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
> > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
> > @@ -16,10 +16,17 @@ user-csingle        := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-csingle))
> >  user-cmulti    := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-cmulti))
> >  user-cobjs     := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-cobjs))
> >
> > +user_nolibc_ccflags := -nostdlib -nostdinc -static -fno-ident -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables \
> > +                     -ffreestanding -fno-stack-protector \
> > +                     -isystem $(objtree)/usr/include -include $(srctree)/tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h -isystem $(srctree)/tools/include/nolibc/
> 
> The tools/ directory is a different world, and Kbuild scripts do not know
> anything about it.

Ack.

How does this statement affect the next patch which creates
tools/include/nolibc/Kconfig.nolibc ?
Is it fine to create the Kconfig file in tools/ or should I move it?
I do want to maintain this file as part of nolibc and not KUnit.
The possibilities I see are init/Kconfig.nolibc or lib/Kconfig.nolibc.

> And, you do not need to implement this in scripts/Makefile.userprogs
> because you can move this to lib/kunit/Makefile.kunit-uapi or somewhere.

Understood. This is not unexpected, as hinted in the commit message.

> > +user_nolibc_ldflags := -nostdlib -nostdinc -static
> > +
> >  user_ccflags   = -Wp,-MMD,$(depfile) $(KBUILD_USERCFLAGS) $(userccflags) \
> > -                       $($(target-stem)-userccflags)
> > -user_ldflags   = $(KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS) $(userldflags) $($(target-stem)-userldflags)
> > -user_ldlibs    = $(userldlibs) $($(target-stem)-userldlibs)
> > +                       $($(target-stem)-userccflags) $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ccflags))
> > +user_ldflags   = $(KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS) $(userldflags) $($(target-stem)-userldflags) \
> > +                       $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ldflags))
> > +user_ldlibs    = $(userldlibs) $($(target-stem)-userldlibs) \
> > +                       $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ldlibs))
> >
> >  # Create an executable from a single .c file
> >  quiet_cmd_user_cc_c = CC [U]  $@


Thomas

Re: [PATCH v3 04/16] kbuild: userprogs: add nolibc support

[Masahiro Yamada]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 4:59 PM Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 12:35:07AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:38 PM Thomas Weißschuh
> > <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > Userprogs are built with the regular kernel compiler $CC.
> > > A kernel compiler does not necessarily contain a libc which is required
> > > for a normal userspace application.
> > > However the kernel tree does contain a minimal libc implementation
> > > "nolibc" which can be used to build userspace applications.
> > >
> > > Introduce support to build userprogs against nolibc instead of the
> > > default libc of the compiler, which may not exist.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > This could probably be moved out of the generic kbuild makefiles.
> > > I think the ergonimics would suffer and this functionality could be
> > > used by other users of userprogs.
> > >
> > > Also this does currently not support out-of-tree builds.
> > > For that tools/include/nolibc/*.h and usr/include/*.h would need to be
> > > installed into the build directory.
>
> <snip>
>
> > > --- a/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
> > > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.userprogs
> > > @@ -16,10 +16,17 @@ user-csingle        := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-csingle))
> > >  user-cmulti    := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-cmulti))
> > >  user-cobjs     := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(user-cobjs))
> > >
> > > +user_nolibc_ccflags := -nostdlib -nostdinc -static -fno-ident -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables \
> > > +                     -ffreestanding -fno-stack-protector \
> > > +                     -isystem $(objtree)/usr/include -include $(srctree)/tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h -isystem $(srctree)/tools/include/nolibc/
> >
> > The tools/ directory is a different world, and Kbuild scripts do not know
> > anything about it.
>
> Ack.
>
> How does this statement affect the next patch which creates
> tools/include/nolibc/Kconfig.nolibc ?
> Is it fine to create the Kconfig file in tools/ or should I move it?
> I do want to maintain this file as part of nolibc and not KUnit.
> The possibilities I see are init/Kconfig.nolibc or lib/Kconfig.nolibc.

Personally I like init/Kconfig.nolibc.
(I am even fine with adding this new entry to init/Kconfig)
But, this file is not what I maintain. It is up to you after all.



> > And, you do not need to implement this in scripts/Makefile.userprogs
> > because you can move this to lib/kunit/Makefile.kunit-uapi or somewhere.
>
> Understood. This is not unexpected, as hinted in the commit message.

One existing example is lib/vdso/Makefile.include, which is included
from multiple Makefiles.





> > > +user_nolibc_ldflags := -nostdlib -nostdinc -static
> > > +
> > >  user_ccflags   = -Wp,-MMD,$(depfile) $(KBUILD_USERCFLAGS) $(userccflags) \
> > > -                       $($(target-stem)-userccflags)
> > > -user_ldflags   = $(KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS) $(userldflags) $($(target-stem)-userldflags)
> > > -user_ldlibs    = $(userldlibs) $($(target-stem)-userldlibs)
> > > +                       $($(target-stem)-userccflags) $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ccflags))
> > > +user_ldflags   = $(KBUILD_USERLDFLAGS) $(userldflags) $($(target-stem)-userldflags) \
> > > +                       $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ldflags))
> > > +user_ldlibs    = $(userldlibs) $($(target-stem)-userldlibs) \
> > > +                       $(if $($(target-stem)-nolibc),$(user_nolibc_ldlibs))
> > >
> > >  # Create an executable from a single .c file
> > >  quiet_cmd_user_cc_c = CC [U]  $@
>
>
> Thomas


--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

[PATCH v3 05/16] kbuild: introduce CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Nolibc does not support all architectures.
Add a kconfig option, so users can know where it is available.

The new option is maintained inside tools/include/nolibc/ as only that
directory is responsible for nolibc's availability.

Reviewed-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@avm.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 init/Kconfig                        |  2 ++
 tools/include/nolibc/Kconfig.nolibc | 15 +++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+)

diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig
index 26cafbad4f1560fb56b4bef31ae29baf54175661..6d10f2816e453d1d28e4b8249cbbd95c28baa0f1 100644
--- a/init/Kconfig
+++ b/init/Kconfig
@@ -92,6 +92,8 @@ config CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC
 	default $(success,$(srctree)/scripts/cc-can-link.sh $(CC) $(CLANG_FLAGS) $(USERCFLAGS) $(USERLDFLAGS) $(m64-flag) -static) if 64BIT
 	default $(success,$(srctree)/scripts/cc-can-link.sh $(CC) $(CLANG_FLAGS) $(USERCFLAGS) $(USERLDFLAGS) $(m32-flag) -static)
 
+source "tools/include/nolibc/Kconfig.nolibc"
+
 # Fixed in GCC 14, 13.3, 12.4 and 11.5
 # https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113921
 config GCC_ASM_GOTO_OUTPUT_BROKEN
diff --git a/tools/include/nolibc/Kconfig.nolibc b/tools/include/nolibc/Kconfig.nolibc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..29cbc5437e70cbc5e256f00b74d0ab4801b40de7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/include/nolibc/Kconfig.nolibc
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+config ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC
+	bool
+	default y if ARM
+	default y if ARM64
+	default y if LOONGARCH
+	default y if M68K
+	default y if MIPS
+	default y if PPC
+	default y if RISCV
+	default y if S390
+	default y if SPARC
+	default y if UML_X86
+	default y if X86

-- 
2.49.0

[PATCH v3 06/16] kbuild: doc: add label for userprogs section

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Some upcoming new documentation should link directly to the userprogs section.

Add a label to the section so it can be referenced.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
index 4cc7a1b89f1803857a4723284613111e9ad71d92..2adea36ac6ebf6c292e01a3e04c0b633e3c1b8ad 100644
--- a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
+++ b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
@@ -891,6 +891,8 @@ This is possible in two ways:
     This will tell kbuild to build lxdialog even if not referenced in
     any rule.
 
+.. _kbuild_userprogs:
+
 Userspace Program support
 =========================
 

-- 
2.49.0

[PATCH v3 07/16] kbuild: introduce blob framework

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Various subsystems embed non-code build artifacts into the kernel,
for example the initramfs, /proc/config.gz, vDSO image, etc.
Currently each user has their own implementation for that.

Add a common "blob" framework to provide this functionality.
It provides standard kbuild and C APIs to embed and later access non-code
build artifacts into the kernel image or modules.

Reviewed-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@avm.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
Due to its closeness to kbuild this is currently added to its MAINTAINER entry.
But I can also maintain it on its own.
---
 Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++--
 MAINTAINERS                        |  2 ++
 include/linux/blob.h               | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 scripts/Makefile.blobs             | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
 scripts/Makefile.build             |  6 ++++++
 scripts/Makefile.clean             |  2 +-
 scripts/blob-wrap.c                | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 7 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
index 2adea36ac6ebf6c292e01a3e04c0b633e3c1b8ad..5d158780948ab6d7d21287231e310dc87d5e1dc7 100644
--- a/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
+++ b/Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst
@@ -525,8 +525,8 @@ otherwise the command line check will fail, and the target will
 always be built.
 
 If the target is already listed in the recognized syntax such as
-obj-y/m, lib-y/m, extra-y/m, always-y/m, hostprogs, userprogs, Kbuild
-automatically adds it to $(targets). Otherwise, the target must be
+obj-y/m, lib-y/m, extra-y/m, always-y/m, hostprogs, userprogs, blobs,
+Kbuild automatically adds it to $(targets). Otherwise, the target must be
 explicitly added to $(targets).
 
 Assignments to $(targets) are without $(obj)/ prefix. if_changed may be
@@ -1019,6 +1019,25 @@ There are two ways to do this.
     This will tell Kbuild to build binderfs_example when it visits this
     Makefile.
 
+.. _kbuild_blobs:
+
+Blob framework
+==============
+
+Kbuild supports wrapping source or generated files into object files which are linked
+into the kernel and then accessed at runtime through ``include/linux/blob.h``.
+
+Example::
+
+  obj-m := some-module.o
+  userprogs := some-userprog
+  blobs := some-userprog.blob.o
+  some-userprog.blob-symbol := some_userprog
+  some-module-y += some-userprog.blob.o
+
+Kbuild will build the :ref:`userprog <kbuild_userprogs>` ``some-userprog`` and
+link it into ``some-module`` from where it can be accessed as ``BLOB(some_userprog)``.
+
 Kbuild clean infrastructure
 ===========================
 
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index a92290fffa163f9fe8fe3f04bf66426f9a894409..435f8af750d40d859b48dd4f93f7991768f218e1 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -13063,11 +13063,13 @@ Q:	https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-kbuild/list/
 T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/masahiroy/linux-kbuild.git
 F:	Documentation/kbuild/
 F:	Makefile
+F:	include/linux/blob.h
 F:	scripts/*vmlinux*
 F:	scripts/Kbuild*
 F:	scripts/Makefile*
 F:	scripts/bash-completion/
 F:	scripts/basic/
+F:	scripts/blob-wrap.c
 F:	scripts/clang-tools/
 F:	scripts/dummy-tools/
 F:	scripts/include/
diff --git a/include/linux/blob.h b/include/linux/blob.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4104d04e036fadce220e05fd2d9b996323dd06e8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/linux/blob.h
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
+/*
+ * Linkable blob API.
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2025, Linutronix GmbH.
+ * Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
+ */
+
+#ifndef _LINUX_BLOB_H
+#define _LINUX_BLOB_H
+
+#include <linux/args.h>
+#include <linux/types.h>
+
+struct blob {
+	const char *const path;
+	const u8 *data;
+	const u8 *end;
+};
+
+#define BLOB(_symbol)	({					\
+	extern const struct blob CONCATENATE(__blob_, _symbol);	\
+	&CONCATENATE(__blob_, _symbol);				\
+})
+
+static inline size_t blob_size(const struct blob *blob)
+{
+	return blob->end - blob->data;
+}
+
+#endif /* _LINUX_BLOB_H */
diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.blobs b/scripts/Makefile.blobs
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..fd20ebb41c1d6509750debf7896a08a143d28759
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/Makefile.blobs
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
+#
+# Build linkable blobs
+#
+
+blobs	:= $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(blobs))
+
+blob-stem = $(subst -,_,$(subst .blob,,$(basename $(patsubst $(obj)/%,%,$@))))
+blob-symbol = $(or $($(target-stem)-symbol),$(blob-stem))
+
+blob-flags = -DBLOB_SYMBOL="$(blob-symbol)" -DBLOB_INPUT=$<
+
+quiet_cmd_blob = BLOB    $@
+      cmd_blob = $(CC) $(c_flags) $(blob-flags) -c -o $@ $(srctree)/scripts/blob-wrap.c
+
+$(blobs): $(obj)/%.blob.o: $(obj)/% $(srctree)/scripts/blob-wrap.c FORCE
+	$(call if_changed_dep,blob)
+
+targets += $(blobs)
diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.build b/scripts/Makefile.build
index a6461ea411f7a95a9dd156897bec43cb22ef1092..de000268a538875596aae597efaf06058474b17d 100644
--- a/scripts/Makefile.build
+++ b/scripts/Makefile.build
@@ -529,6 +529,12 @@ ifneq ($(need-dtbslist)$(dtb-y)$(dtb-)$(filter %.dtb %.dtb.o %.dtbo.o,$(targets)
 include $(srctree)/scripts/Makefile.dtbs
 endif
 
+# $(sort ...) is used here to remove duplicated words and excessive spaces.
+blobs := $(sort $(blobs))
+ifneq ($(blobs),)
+include $(srctree)/scripts/Makefile.blobs
+endif
+
 # Build
 # ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.clean b/scripts/Makefile.clean
index 6ead00ec7313b3e4330a8de5f1342f2da1d6eb84..536972b0a528d117e17296da9936825c3903af6e 100644
--- a/scripts/Makefile.clean
+++ b/scripts/Makefile.clean
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ subdir-ymn	:= $(addprefix $(obj)/,$(subdir-ymn))
 # directory
 
 __clean-files	:= \
-	$(clean-files) $(targets) $(hostprogs) $(userprogs) \
+	$(clean-files) $(targets) $(hostprogs) $(userprogs) $(blobs) \
 	$(extra-y) $(extra-m) $(extra-) \
 	$(always-y) $(always-m) $(always-) \
 	$(hostprogs-always-y) $(hostprogs-always-m) $(hostprogs-always-) \
diff --git a/scripts/blob-wrap.c b/scripts/blob-wrap.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..82ab3bc641bd69ec35029c2f4a9dd6d6c6720a02
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/blob-wrap.c
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+#include <linux/args.h>
+#include <linux/blob.h>
+#include <linux/stringify.h>
+
+#define BLOB_SYMBOL_DATA	CONCATENATE(__blob_data_, BLOB_SYMBOL)
+#define BLOB_SYMBOL_END		CONCATENATE(__blob_end_, BLOB_SYMBOL)
+
+asm (
+"	.pushsection .rodata, \"a\"\n"
+"	.global " __stringify(BLOB_SYMBOL_DATA) "\n"
+__stringify(BLOB_SYMBOL_DATA) ":\n"
+"	.incbin \"" __stringify(BLOB_INPUT) "\"\n"
+"	.global " __stringify(BLOB_SYMBOL_END) "\n"
+__stringify(BLOB_SYMBOL_END) ":\n"
+"	.popsection\n"
+);
+
+extern const u8 BLOB_SYMBOL_DATA;
+extern const u8 BLOB_SYMBOL_END;
+
+const struct blob CONCATENATE(__blob_, BLOB_SYMBOL) = {
+	.path	= __stringify(BLOB_INPUT),
+	.data	= &BLOB_SYMBOL_DATA,
+	.end	= &BLOB_SYMBOL_END,
+};

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 07/16] kbuild: introduce blob framework

[Masahiro Yamada]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:38 PM Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Various subsystems embed non-code build artifacts into the kernel,
> for example the initramfs, /proc/config.gz, vDSO image, etc.
> Currently each user has their own implementation for that.
>
> Add a common "blob" framework to provide this functionality.
> It provides standard kbuild and C APIs to embed and later access non-code
> build artifacts into the kernel image or modules.
>
> Reviewed-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@avm.de>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>

Kbuild provides only a small set of syntaxes, yet it's flexible enough
to allow each Makefile to implement what it needs.
I aim to keep Kbuild scripts as simple as possible and avoid over-engineering.

Instead, you can implement this in lib/kunit/Makefile.kunit-uapi or somewhere.
That way, I do not have to be worried about what you do.

Also, your separate blob approach looks questionable to me.
In your approach, the blob (kunit-example-uapi.blob.o)
and the entry point (kunit-example-test.o) can be separate modules.
The entry point would be a small amount of boilerplate.
I would keep the user-program blob and its entry point in the same C file.
(and I may consider writing a macro for populating a blob + knit entry)



> ---
> Due to its closeness to kbuild this is currently added to its MAINTAINER entry.
> But I can also maintain it on its own.

Or, maybe do not add this.






-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

Re: [PATCH v3 07/16] kbuild: introduce blob framework

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 12:38:21AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:38 PM Thomas Weißschuh
> <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Various subsystems embed non-code build artifacts into the kernel,
> > for example the initramfs, /proc/config.gz, vDSO image, etc.
> > Currently each user has their own implementation for that.
> >
> > Add a common "blob" framework to provide this functionality.
> > It provides standard kbuild and C APIs to embed and later access non-code
> > build artifacts into the kernel image or modules.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@avm.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> 
> Kbuild provides only a small set of syntaxes, yet it's flexible enough
> to allow each Makefile to implement what it needs.
> I aim to keep Kbuild scripts as simple as possible and avoid over-engineering.
> 
> Instead, you can implement this in lib/kunit/Makefile.kunit-uapi or somewhere.
> That way, I do not have to be worried about what you do.

The goal was to have a framework that can be used independently of KUnit,
for the usecases listed in the commit message (and a few unlisted ones).
But I can go with a more specific solution, too.

> Also, your separate blob approach looks questionable to me.

> In your approach, the blob (kunit-example-uapi.blob.o)
> and the entry point (kunit-example-test.o) can be separate modules.

Indeed, however I don't see the issue for this specific point.

> The entry point would be a small amount of boilerplate.
> I would keep the user-program blob and its entry point in the same C file.

A Makefile dependency between the C file and blob payload is also necessary.

> (and I may consider writing a macro for populating a blob + knit entry)

That is what I had in during my early development,
and I guess I'll go with it again.


Thomas

[PATCH v3 08/16] kunit: tool: Add test for nested test result reporting

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Currently there is no test validating the result reporting from nested
tests. Add one, it will also be used to validate upcoming changes to the
nested test parsing.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py                           | 9 +++++++++
 .../kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log       | 7 +++++++
 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
index bbba921e0eacb18663abfcabb2bccf330d8666f5..691cde9b030f7729128490c1bdb42ccee1967ad6 100755
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
@@ -165,6 +165,15 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase):
 		self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
 		self.assertEqual(result.counts.errors, 0)
 
+	def test_parse_failed_nested_tests_log(self):
+		nested_log = test_data_path('test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log')
+		with open(nested_log) as file:
+			result = kunit_parser.parse_run_tests(file.readlines(), stdout)
+		self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
+		self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 2)
+		self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[0].status)
+		self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[1].status)
+
 	def test_no_header(self):
 		empty_log = test_data_path('test_is_test_passed-no_tests_run_no_header.log')
 		with open(empty_log) as file:
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..835816e0a07715a514f5f5afab1b6250037feaf4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+KTAP version 1
+1..2
+not ok 1 subtest 1
+    KTAP version 1
+    1..1
+        not ok 1 test 1
+not ok 2 subtest 2

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 08/16] kunit: tool: Add test for nested test result reporting

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3099 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Currently there is no test validating the result reporting from nested
> tests. Add one, it will also be used to validate upcoming changes to the
> nested test parsing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---

This looks good, modulo a couple of minor suggestions below.

Regardless,
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

Cheers,
-- David

>  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py                           | 9 +++++++++
>  .../kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log       | 7 +++++++
>  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> index bbba921e0eacb18663abfcabb2bccf330d8666f5..691cde9b030f7729128490c1bdb42ccee1967ad6 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> @@ -165,6 +165,15 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase):
>                 self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
>                 self.assertEqual(result.counts.errors, 0)
>
> +       def test_parse_failed_nested_tests_log(self):
> +               nested_log = test_data_path('test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log')
> +               with open(nested_log) as file:
> +                       result = kunit_parser.parse_run_tests(file.readlines(), stdout)
> +               self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
> +               self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 2)
> +               self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[0].status)

Is it worth also testing the value of the nested test's result here? i.e.,
self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE,
result.subtests[0].subtests[0].status)


> +               self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[1].status)
> +
>         def test_no_header(self):
>                 empty_log = test_data_path('test_is_test_passed-no_tests_run_no_header.log')
>                 with open(empty_log) as file:
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..835816e0a07715a514f5f5afab1b6250037feaf4
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
> +KTAP version 1
> +1..2
> +not ok 1 subtest 1
> +    KTAP version 1
> +    1..1
> +        not ok 1 test 1
> +not ok 2 subtest 2

Having these named 'subtest 1' and 'test 1' is a bit confusing to me
(as it implies the outer tests are subtests of the inner ones, which
isn't right).

Could we either swap 'subtest' and 'test' here, or -- if we want to
preserve the match between 'subtest' here and the subtest in the
python code -- label the inner one something like 'subsubtest'?


>
> --
> 2.49.0
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v3 08/16] kunit: tool: Add test for nested test result reporting

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 05:37:39PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
> <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Currently there is no test validating the result reporting from nested
> > tests. Add one, it will also be used to validate upcoming changes to the
> > nested test parsing.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > ---
> 
> This looks good, modulo a couple of minor suggestions below.
> 
> Regardless,
> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> 
> Cheers,
> -- David
> 
> >  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py                           | 9 +++++++++
> >  .../kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log       | 7 +++++++
> >  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > index bbba921e0eacb18663abfcabb2bccf330d8666f5..691cde9b030f7729128490c1bdb42ccee1967ad6 100755
> > --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > @@ -165,6 +165,15 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase):
> >                 self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
> >                 self.assertEqual(result.counts.errors, 0)
> >
> > +       def test_parse_failed_nested_tests_log(self):
> > +               nested_log = test_data_path('test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log')
> > +               with open(nested_log) as file:
> > +                       result = kunit_parser.parse_run_tests(file.readlines(), stdout)
> > +               self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
> > +               self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 2)
> > +               self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[0].status)
> 
> Is it worth also testing the value of the nested test's result here? i.e.,
> self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE,
> result.subtests[0].subtests[0].status)

This should be result.subtests[1].subtests[0].status.
But Ack and done.

> > +               self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[1].status)
> > +
> >         def test_no_header(self):
> >                 empty_log = test_data_path('test_is_test_passed-no_tests_run_no_header.log')
> >                 with open(empty_log) as file:
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..835816e0a07715a514f5f5afab1b6250037feaf4
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> > @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
> > +KTAP version 1
> > +1..2
> > +not ok 1 subtest 1
> > +    KTAP version 1
> > +    1..1
> > +        not ok 1 test 1
> > +not ok 2 subtest 2
> 
> Having these named 'subtest 1' and 'test 1' is a bit confusing to me
> (as it implies the outer tests are subtests of the inner ones, which
> isn't right).
> 
> Could we either swap 'subtest' and 'test' here, or -- if we want to
> preserve the match between 'subtest' here and the subtest in the
> python code -- label the inner one something like 'subsubtest'?

Ack.

[PATCH v3 09/16] kunit: tool: Don't overwrite test status based on subtest counts

[Thomas Weißschuh]

If a subtest itself reports success, but the outer testcase fails,
the whole testcase should be reported as a failure.
However the status is recalculated based on the test counts,
overwriting the outer test result.
Synthesize a failed test in this case to make sure the failure is not
swallowed.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py                                  | 5 +++++
 tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py                               | 2 +-
 tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log | 3 +++
 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
index c176487356e6c94882046b19ea696d750905b8d5..2478beb28fc3db825855ad46200340e884da7df1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
@@ -686,6 +686,11 @@ def bubble_up_test_results(test: Test) -> None:
 		counts.add_status(status)
 	elif test.counts.get_status() == TestStatus.TEST_CRASHED:
 		test.status = TestStatus.TEST_CRASHED
+	if not test.ok_status():
+		for t in subtests:
+			if not t.ok_status():
+				counts.add_status(t.status)
+				break
 
 def parse_test(lines: LineStream, expected_num: int, log: List[str], is_subtest: bool, printer: Printer) -> Test:
 	"""
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
index 691cde9b030f7729128490c1bdb42ccee1967ad6..c25f52650837e83325b06bddd2aa665fd29f91d9 100755
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase):
 		with open(nested_log) as file:
 			result = kunit_parser.parse_run_tests(file.readlines(), stdout)
 		self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
-		self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 2)
+		self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 3)
 		self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[0].status)
 		self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[1].status)
 
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
index 835816e0a07715a514f5f5afab1b6250037feaf4..cd9033c464792e6294905a5676346684182874ad 100644
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 KTAP version 1
 1..2
+    KTAP version 1
+    1..1
+        ok 1 test 1
 not ok 1 subtest 1
     KTAP version 1
     1..1

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 09/16] kunit: tool: Don't overwrite test status based on subtest counts

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4155 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> If a subtest itself reports success, but the outer testcase fails,
> the whole testcase should be reported as a failure.
> However the status is recalculated based on the test counts,
> overwriting the outer test result.
> Synthesize a failed test in this case to make sure the failure is not
> swallowed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---

Hmm... this is definitely a nasty edge-case. I don't completely like
this solution, but none of the other options seem drastically better.

I think the more obvious options are either to _always_ count tests
alongside their subtests, or to _never_ do so, but acknowledge that
"test failed, but failure count is 0" is a valid option. But neither
of those are especially satisfying, either greatly inflating test
counts, or creating obvious contradictions.

So I'm tentatively in favour of this, but if anyone has a nicer way of
doing it, I'm all ears.

The implementation looks good. If we can add the explicit checks for
the sub(sub)test results as mentioned in the previous patch, that'd be
even better.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

>  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py                                  | 5 +++++
>  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py                               | 2 +-
>  tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log | 3 +++
>  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> index c176487356e6c94882046b19ea696d750905b8d5..2478beb28fc3db825855ad46200340e884da7df1 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> @@ -686,6 +686,11 @@ def bubble_up_test_results(test: Test) -> None:
>                 counts.add_status(status)
>         elif test.counts.get_status() == TestStatus.TEST_CRASHED:
>                 test.status = TestStatus.TEST_CRASHED
> +       if not test.ok_status():
> +               for t in subtests:
> +                       if not t.ok_status():
> +                               counts.add_status(t.status)
> +                               break
>
>  def parse_test(lines: LineStream, expected_num: int, log: List[str], is_subtest: bool, printer: Printer) -> Test:
>         """
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> index 691cde9b030f7729128490c1bdb42ccee1967ad6..c25f52650837e83325b06bddd2aa665fd29f91d9 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase):
>                 with open(nested_log) as file:
>                         result = kunit_parser.parse_run_tests(file.readlines(), stdout)
>                 self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
> -               self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 2)
> +               self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 3)
>                 self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[0].status)

Could we add:
self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.SUCCESS,
result.subtests[0].subtests[0].status)

>                 self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[1].status)

and

self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE,
result.subtests[1].subtests[0].status)


>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> index 835816e0a07715a514f5f5afab1b6250037feaf4..cd9033c464792e6294905a5676346684182874ad 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> @@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
>  KTAP version 1
>  1..2
> +    KTAP version 1
> +    1..1
> +        ok 1 test 1
>  not ok 1 subtest 1
>      KTAP version 1
>      1..1
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v3 09/16] kunit: tool: Don't overwrite test status based on subtest counts

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 05:37:44PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
> <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > If a subtest itself reports success, but the outer testcase fails,
> > the whole testcase should be reported as a failure.
> > However the status is recalculated based on the test counts,
> > overwriting the outer test result.
> > Synthesize a failed test in this case to make sure the failure is not
> > swallowed.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > ---
> 
> Hmm... this is definitely a nasty edge-case. I don't completely like
> this solution, but none of the other options seem drastically better.
> 
> I think the more obvious options are either to _always_ count tests
> alongside their subtests, or to _never_ do so, but acknowledge that
> "test failed, but failure count is 0" is a valid option. But neither
> of those are especially satisfying, either greatly inflating test
> counts, or creating obvious contradictions.
> 
> So I'm tentatively in favour of this, but if anyone has a nicer way of
> doing it, I'm all ears.

Agreed, it is not great. I'd also be happy for better ideas.

> The implementation looks good. If we can add the explicit checks for
> the sub(sub)test results as mentioned in the previous patch, that'd be
> even better.
> 
> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> 
> >  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py                                  | 5 +++++
> >  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py                               | 2 +-
> >  tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log | 3 +++
> >  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> > index c176487356e6c94882046b19ea696d750905b8d5..2478beb28fc3db825855ad46200340e884da7df1 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> > +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> > @@ -686,6 +686,11 @@ def bubble_up_test_results(test: Test) -> None:
> >                 counts.add_status(status)
> >         elif test.counts.get_status() == TestStatus.TEST_CRASHED:
> >                 test.status = TestStatus.TEST_CRASHED
> > +       if not test.ok_status():
> > +               for t in subtests:
> > +                       if not t.ok_status():
> > +                               counts.add_status(t.status)
> > +                               break
> >
> >  def parse_test(lines: LineStream, expected_num: int, log: List[str], is_subtest: bool, printer: Printer) -> Test:
> >         """
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > index 691cde9b030f7729128490c1bdb42ccee1967ad6..c25f52650837e83325b06bddd2aa665fd29f91d9 100755
> > --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py
> > @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ class KUnitParserTest(unittest.TestCase):
> >                 with open(nested_log) as file:
> >                         result = kunit_parser.parse_run_tests(file.readlines(), stdout)
> >                 self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.status)
> > -               self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 2)
> > +               self.assertEqual(result.counts.failed, 3)
> >                 self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[0].status)
> 
> Could we add:
> self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.SUCCESS,
> result.subtests[0].subtests[0].status)
> 
> >                 self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE, result.subtests[1].status)

Ack.

> and
> 
> self.assertEqual(kunit_parser.TestStatus.FAILURE,
> result.subtests[1].subtests[0].status)

This is now already in the previous patch.

> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> > index 835816e0a07715a514f5f5afab1b6250037feaf4..cd9033c464792e6294905a5676346684182874ad 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> > +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log
> > @@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
> >  KTAP version 1
> >  1..2
> > +    KTAP version 1
> > +    1..1
> > +        ok 1 test 1
> >  not ok 1 subtest 1
> >      KTAP version 1
> >      1..1
> >
> > --
> > 2.49.0
> >

[PATCH v3 10/16] kunit: tool: Parse skipped tests from kselftest.h

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Skipped tests reported by kselftest.h use a different format than KTAP,
there is no explicit test name. Normally the test name is part of the
free-form string after the SKIP keyword:

	ok 3 # SKIP test: some reason

Extend the parser to handle those correctly. Use the free-form string as
test name instead.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py                             | 8 +++++---
 tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log | 3 ++-
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
index 2478beb28fc3db825855ad46200340e884da7df1..4599d23c79b79f0e219d655c7053c8c3b34f8152 100644
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
@@ -352,9 +352,9 @@ def parse_test_plan(lines: LineStream, test: Test) -> bool:
 	lines.pop()
 	return True
 
-TEST_RESULT = re.compile(r'^\s*(ok|not ok) ([0-9]+) (- )?([^#]*)( # .*)?$')
+TEST_RESULT = re.compile(r'^\s*(ok|not ok) ([0-9]+)? ?(- )?([^#]*)( # .*)?$')
 
-TEST_RESULT_SKIP = re.compile(r'^\s*(ok|not ok) ([0-9]+) (- )?(.*) # SKIP(.*)$')
+TEST_RESULT_SKIP = re.compile(r'^\s*(ok|not ok) ([0-9]+)? ?(- )?(.*) # SKIP ?(.*)$')
 
 def peek_test_name_match(lines: LineStream, test: Test) -> bool:
 	"""
@@ -379,6 +379,8 @@ def peek_test_name_match(lines: LineStream, test: Test) -> bool:
 	if not match:
 		return False
 	name = match.group(4)
+	if not name:
+		return False
 	return name == test.name
 
 def parse_test_result(lines: LineStream, test: Test,
@@ -416,7 +418,7 @@ def parse_test_result(lines: LineStream, test: Test,
 
 	# Set name of test object
 	if skip_match:
-		test.name = skip_match.group(4)
+		test.name = skip_match.group(4) or skip_match.group(5)
 	else:
 		test.name = match.group(4)
 
diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log
index 65d3f27feaf22a3f47ed831c4c24f6f11c625a92..30d9ef18bcec177067288d5242771236f29b7d56 100644
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 TAP version 13
-1..2
+1..3
 # selftests: membarrier: membarrier_test_single_thread
 # TAP version 13
 # 1..2
@@ -12,3 +12,4 @@ ok 1 selftests: membarrier: membarrier_test_single_thread
 # ok 1 sys_membarrier available
 # ok 2 sys membarrier invalid command test: command = -1, flags = 0, errno = 22. Failed as expected
 ok 2 selftests: membarrier: membarrier_test_multi_thread
+ok 3 # SKIP selftests: membarrier: membarrier_test_multi_thread

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 10/16] kunit: tool: Parse skipped tests from kselftest.h

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3243 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Skipped tests reported by kselftest.h use a different format than KTAP,
> there is no explicit test name. Normally the test name is part of the
> free-form string after the SKIP keyword:
>
>         ok 3 # SKIP test: some reason
>
> Extend the parser to handle those correctly. Use the free-form string as
> test name instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---

Nice: this is a great improvement.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

Cheers,
-- David


>  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py                             | 8 +++++---
>  tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log | 3 ++-
>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> index 2478beb28fc3db825855ad46200340e884da7df1..4599d23c79b79f0e219d655c7053c8c3b34f8152 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py
> @@ -352,9 +352,9 @@ def parse_test_plan(lines: LineStream, test: Test) -> bool:
>         lines.pop()
>         return True
>
> -TEST_RESULT = re.compile(r'^\s*(ok|not ok) ([0-9]+) (- )?([^#]*)( # .*)?$')
> +TEST_RESULT = re.compile(r'^\s*(ok|not ok) ([0-9]+)? ?(- )?([^#]*)( # .*)?$')
>
> -TEST_RESULT_SKIP = re.compile(r'^\s*(ok|not ok) ([0-9]+) (- )?(.*) # SKIP(.*)$')
> +TEST_RESULT_SKIP = re.compile(r'^\s*(ok|not ok) ([0-9]+)? ?(- )?(.*) # SKIP ?(.*)$')
>
>  def peek_test_name_match(lines: LineStream, test: Test) -> bool:
>         """
> @@ -379,6 +379,8 @@ def peek_test_name_match(lines: LineStream, test: Test) -> bool:
>         if not match:
>                 return False
>         name = match.group(4)
> +       if not name:
> +               return False
>         return name == test.name
>
>  def parse_test_result(lines: LineStream, test: Test,
> @@ -416,7 +418,7 @@ def parse_test_result(lines: LineStream, test: Test,
>
>         # Set name of test object
>         if skip_match:
> -               test.name = skip_match.group(4)
> +               test.name = skip_match.group(4) or skip_match.group(5)
>         else:
>                 test.name = match.group(4)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log
> index 65d3f27feaf22a3f47ed831c4c24f6f11c625a92..30d9ef18bcec177067288d5242771236f29b7d56 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>  TAP version 13
> -1..2
> +1..3
>  # selftests: membarrier: membarrier_test_single_thread
>  # TAP version 13
>  # 1..2
> @@ -12,3 +12,4 @@ ok 1 selftests: membarrier: membarrier_test_single_thread
>  # ok 1 sys_membarrier available
>  # ok 2 sys membarrier invalid command test: command = -1, flags = 0, errno = 22. Failed as expected
>  ok 2 selftests: membarrier: membarrier_test_multi_thread
> +ok 3 # SKIP selftests: membarrier: membarrier_test_multi_thread
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

[PATCH v3 11/16] kunit: Always descend into kunit directory during build

[Thomas Weißschuh]

An upcoming change will add 'userprogs' to the kunit subdirectory.
For kbuild to properly clean up these build artifacts the subdirectory
needs to be always processed.

Pushing the special logic for hook.o into the kunit Makefile also makes the
logic easier to understand.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 lib/Makefile       | 4 ----
 lib/kunit/Makefile | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/Makefile b/lib/Makefile
index c38582f187dd81916113319072e5cfef26f26c84..698566135091cc3bf0054f1954b434dc3325364a 100644
--- a/lib/Makefile
+++ b/lib/Makefile
@@ -108,11 +108,7 @@ test_fpu-y := test_fpu_glue.o test_fpu_impl.o
 CFLAGS_test_fpu_impl.o += $(CC_FLAGS_FPU)
 CFLAGS_REMOVE_test_fpu_impl.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
 
-# Some KUnit files (hooks.o) need to be built-in even when KUnit is a module,
-# so we can't just use obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT).
-ifdef CONFIG_KUNIT
 obj-y += kunit/
-endif
 
 ifeq ($(CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT),y)
 CFLAGS_kobject.o += -DDEBUG
diff --git a/lib/kunit/Makefile b/lib/kunit/Makefile
index 5aa51978e456ab3bb60c12071a26cf2bdcb1b508..656f1fa35abcc635e67d5b4cb1bc586b48415ac5 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
+++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ kunit-objs +=				debugfs.o
 endif
 
 # KUnit 'hooks' are built-in even when KUnit is built as a module.
-obj-y +=				hooks.o
+obj-$(if $(CONFIG_KUNIT),y) +=		hooks.o
 
 obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) +=		kunit-test.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) +=		platform-test.o

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 11/16] kunit: Always descend into kunit directory during build

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2282 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> An upcoming change will add 'userprogs' to the kunit subdirectory.
> For kbuild to properly clean up these build artifacts the subdirectory
> needs to be always processed.
>
> Pushing the special logic for hook.o into the kunit Makefile also makes the
> logic easier to understand.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---

I'm quite happy with this.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

Cheers,
-- David


>  lib/Makefile       | 4 ----
>  lib/kunit/Makefile | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/Makefile b/lib/Makefile
> index c38582f187dd81916113319072e5cfef26f26c84..698566135091cc3bf0054f1954b434dc3325364a 100644
> --- a/lib/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/Makefile
> @@ -108,11 +108,7 @@ test_fpu-y := test_fpu_glue.o test_fpu_impl.o
>  CFLAGS_test_fpu_impl.o += $(CC_FLAGS_FPU)
>  CFLAGS_REMOVE_test_fpu_impl.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
>
> -# Some KUnit files (hooks.o) need to be built-in even when KUnit is a module,
> -# so we can't just use obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT).
> -ifdef CONFIG_KUNIT
>  obj-y += kunit/
> -endif
>
>  ifeq ($(CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT),y)
>  CFLAGS_kobject.o += -DDEBUG
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/Makefile b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> index 5aa51978e456ab3bb60c12071a26cf2bdcb1b508..656f1fa35abcc635e67d5b4cb1bc586b48415ac5 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ kunit-objs +=                         debugfs.o
>  endif
>
>  # KUnit 'hooks' are built-in even when KUnit is built as a module.
> -obj-y +=                               hooks.o
> +obj-$(if $(CONFIG_KUNIT),y) +=         hooks.o
>
>  obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) +=            kunit-test.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) +=            platform-test.o
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20250611-kunit-kselftests-v3-11-55e3d148cbc6%40linutronix.de.

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

[PATCH v3 12/16] kunit: qemu_configs: loongarch: Enable LSX/LSAX

[Thomas Weißschuh]

The upcoming kunit UAPI framework will run userspace executables as part of
kunit. These may use the LSX or LASX instructions.

Make sure the kunit kernel can handle these instructions.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py b/tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py
index a92422967d1da9f1658ef1e80d0d7365ddbae307..1dba755284f11ffc94d8946105b0cfa49cb6f604 100644
--- a/tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py
+++ b/tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ CONFIG_PVPANIC_PCI=y
 CONFIG_SERIAL_8250=y
 CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_CONSOLE=y
 CONFIG_SERIAL_OF_PLATFORM=y
+CONFIG_CPU_HAS_LSX=y
+CONFIG_CPU_HAS_LASX=y
 ''',
 			   qemu_arch='loongarch64',
 			   kernel_path='arch/loongarch/boot/vmlinux.elf',

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 12/16] kunit: qemu_configs: loongarch: Enable LSX/LSAX

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1374 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> The upcoming kunit UAPI framework will run userspace executables as part of
> kunit. These may use the LSX or LASX instructions.
>
> Make sure the kunit kernel can handle these instructions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---

Looks fine to me. I confess to not knowing much about the details of
Loongarch CPUs, though, so while it hasn't broken anything here, I
make no further guarantees.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

Cheers,
-- David


>  tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py b/tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py
> index a92422967d1da9f1658ef1e80d0d7365ddbae307..1dba755284f11ffc94d8946105b0cfa49cb6f604 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py
> +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py
> @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ CONFIG_PVPANIC_PCI=y
>  CONFIG_SERIAL_8250=y
>  CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_CONSOLE=y
>  CONFIG_SERIAL_OF_PLATFORM=y
> +CONFIG_CPU_HAS_LSX=y
> +CONFIG_CPU_HAS_LASX=y
>  ''',
>                            qemu_arch='loongarch64',
>                            kernel_path='arch/loongarch/boot/vmlinux.elf',
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

[PATCH v3 13/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Enable running UAPI tests as part of kunit.
The selftests are embedded into the kernel image and their output is
forwarded to kunit for unified reporting.

The implementation reuses parts of usermode drivers and usermode
helpers. However these frameworks are not used directly as they make it
impossible to retrieve a thread's exit code.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>

---
Currently this depends on CONFIG_KUNIT=y as it uses some non-exported
symbols around process management.
---
 Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst |   5 +
 Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst  |  12 ++
 include/kunit/uapi.h                        |  24 +++
 lib/kunit/Kconfig                           |  10 +
 lib/kunit/Makefile                          |   2 +
 lib/kunit/uapi.c                            | 287 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 6 files changed, 340 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst
index 5cdb552a0808f25baeff5e47a9227b7b62c69e40..34d8fee9a97059d6da919a6fb1a7e359b5e0beef 100644
--- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst
+++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ API Reference
 	test
 	resource
 	functionredirection
+	uapi
 	clk
 	of
 	platformdevice
@@ -32,6 +33,10 @@ Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/functionredirection.rst
 
  - Documents the KUnit Function Redirection API
 
+Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst
+
+ - Documents the KUnit Userspace testing API
+
 Driver KUnit API
 ================
 
diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b4764424c629bf69194cf2786f52aef154b02bf8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+==================
+Userspace Test API
+==================
+
+This file documents all of the userspace testing API.
+Userspace tests should be built as :ref:`userprogs <kbuild_userprogs>` and included into the test
+module or kernel as :ref:`blobs <kbuild_blobs>`.
+
+.. kernel-doc:: include/kunit/uapi.h
+   :internal:
diff --git a/include/kunit/uapi.h b/include/kunit/uapi.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a6181790c96a42df05839097991c1fbfd889cdbe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/kunit/uapi.h
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
+/*
+ * KUnit Userspace testing API.
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2025, Linutronix GmbH.
+ * Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
+ */
+
+#ifndef _KUNIT_UAPI_H
+#define _KUNIT_UAPI_H
+
+struct blob;
+struct kunit;
+
+/**
+ * kunit_uapi_run_kselftest() - Run a userspace kselftest as part of kunit
+ * @test: The test context object.
+ * @executable: kselftest executable to run
+ *
+ * Runs the kselftest and forwards its TAP output and exit status to kunit.
+ */
+void kunit_uapi_run_kselftest(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *executable);
+
+#endif /* _KUNIT_UAPI_H */
diff --git a/lib/kunit/Kconfig b/lib/kunit/Kconfig
index a97897edd9642f3e5df7fdd9dee26ee5cf00d6a4..1f2f5f2213a7d8438cd2683955f22e34f3a036dd 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/Kconfig
+++ b/lib/kunit/Kconfig
@@ -93,4 +93,14 @@ config KUNIT_AUTORUN_ENABLED
 	  In most cases this should be left as Y. Only if additional opt-in
 	  behavior is needed should this be set to N.
 
+config KUNIT_UAPI
+	def_bool y
+	depends on KUNIT=y
+	depends on CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC || ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC
+	select HEADERS_INSTALL
+	help
+	  Enables support for building and running userspace selftests as part of kunit.
+	  These tests should be statically linked and use kselftest.h or kselftest_harness.h
+	  for status reporting.
+
 endif # KUNIT
diff --git a/lib/kunit/Makefile b/lib/kunit/Makefile
index 656f1fa35abcc635e67d5b4cb1bc586b48415ac5..dafa09bd4241c24d31c4c19edecb67bf724127d7 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
+++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ kunit-objs +=				test.o \
 					device.o \
 					platform.o
 
+kunit-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI) +=		uapi.o
+
 ifeq ($(CONFIG_KUNIT_DEBUGFS),y)
 kunit-objs +=				debugfs.o
 endif
diff --git a/lib/kunit/uapi.c b/lib/kunit/uapi.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..121146dda533b3f90aca37c20bd0e7a1d20cb3b5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/kunit/uapi.c
@@ -0,0 +1,287 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * KUnit Userspace testing API.
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2025, Linutronix GmbH.
+ * Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
+ */
+
+#include <linux/binfmts.h>
+#include <linux/blob.h>
+#include <linux/file.h>
+#include <linux/fs.h>
+#include <linux/fs_struct.h>
+#include <linux/pid.h>
+#include <linux/pipe_fs_i.h>
+#include <linux/sched/task.h>
+#include <linux/types.h>
+
+#include <kunit/test.h>
+#include <kunit/uapi.h>
+
+#define KSFT_PASS	0
+#define KSFT_FAIL	1
+#define KSFT_XFAIL	2
+#define KSFT_XPASS	3
+#define KSFT_SKIP	4
+
+static struct vfsmount *kunit_uapi_mount_ramfs(void)
+{
+	struct file_system_type *type;
+	struct vfsmount *mnt;
+
+	type = get_fs_type("ramfs");
+	if (!type)
+		return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
+
+	/* FIXME
+	 * The mount setup is supposed to look like this:
+	 * kunit_uapi_mount_ramfs() sets up a private mount,
+	 * with nothing visible except the new tmpfs.
+	 * Then each executable execution gets a new namespace on top of that
+	 * on which it can mount whatever it needs.
+	 * However I didn't manage to set this up, so keep everything simple
+	 * for now and let somebody familiar with the VFS figure this out.
+	 */
+
+	mnt = kern_mount(type);
+	put_filesystem(type);
+
+	return mnt;
+}
+
+static int kunit_uapi_write_file(struct vfsmount *mnt, const char *name, mode_t mode,
+				 const u8 *data, size_t size)
+{
+	struct file *file;
+	ssize_t written;
+
+	file = file_open_root_mnt(mnt, name, O_CREAT | O_WRONLY, mode);
+	if (IS_ERR(file))
+		return PTR_ERR(file);
+
+	written = kernel_write(file, data, size, NULL);
+	filp_close(file, NULL);
+	if (written != size) {
+		if (written >= 0)
+			return -ENOMEM;
+		return written;
+	}
+
+	/* Flush delayed fput so exec can open the file read-only */
+	flush_delayed_fput();
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+struct kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_ctx {
+	const char *executable;
+
+	/* Signals mnt, out, pwd and tgid */
+	struct completion setup_done;
+	struct vfsmount *mnt;
+	struct file *out;
+	struct path pwd;
+	pid_t tgid;
+
+	/* Valid after wait(tgid) */
+	int exec_err;
+};
+
+static int kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_init(void *data)
+{
+	struct kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_ctx *ctx = data;
+	const char *const argv[] = {
+		ctx->executable,
+		NULL
+	};
+	struct file *out[2];
+	int err;
+
+	err = create_pipe_files(out, 0);
+	if (err)
+		return err;
+
+	/* stdin, use the *write* end to the pipe to have an unreadable input */
+	err = replace_fd(0, out[1], 0);
+	if (err < 0) {
+		fput(out[0]);
+		fput(out[1]);
+		return err;
+	}
+
+	/* stdout */
+	err = replace_fd(1, out[1], 0);
+	if (err < 0) {
+		replace_fd(0, NULL, 0);
+		fput(out[0]);
+		fput(out[1]);
+		return err;
+	}
+
+	/* stderr */
+	err = replace_fd(2, out[1], 0);
+	if (err < 0) {
+		replace_fd(0, NULL, 0);
+		replace_fd(1, NULL, 0);
+		fput(out[0]);
+		fput(out[1]);
+		return err;
+	}
+
+	fput(out[1]);
+
+	ctx->out = out[0];
+	ctx->tgid = current->tgid;
+
+	set_fs_pwd(current->fs, &ctx->pwd);
+	kernel_sigaction(SIGKILL, SIG_DFL);
+	kernel_sigaction(SIGABRT, SIG_DFL);
+
+	complete(&ctx->setup_done);
+	ctx->exec_err = kernel_execve(ctx->executable, argv, NULL);
+	if (!ctx->exec_err)
+		return 0;
+	do_exit(0);
+}
+
+static size_t kunit_uapi_printk_subtest_lines(struct kunit *test, char *buf, size_t s)
+{
+	const char *ptr = buf, *newline;
+	size_t n;
+
+	while (s) {
+		newline = strnchr(ptr, s, '\n');
+		if (!newline)
+			break;
+
+		n = newline - ptr + 1;
+
+		kunit_log(KERN_INFO, test, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%.*s", (int)n, ptr);
+		ptr += n;
+		s -= n;
+	}
+
+	memmove(buf, ptr, s);
+
+	return s;
+}
+
+static int kunit_uapi_forward_to_printk(struct kunit *test, struct file *output)
+{
+	/*
+	 * printk() automatically adds a newline after each message.
+	 * Therefore only fully accumulated lines can be forwarded.
+	 * Each line needs to fit into the buffer below.
+	 */
+	char buf[512];
+	size_t s = 0;
+	ssize_t n;
+
+	while (1) {
+		n = kernel_read(output, buf + s, sizeof(buf) - s, NULL);
+		if (n <= 0)
+			return n;
+		s = kunit_uapi_printk_subtest_lines(test, buf, s + n);
+	}
+}
+
+static void kunit_uapi_kill_pid(pid_t pid)
+{
+	struct pid *p;
+
+	p = find_get_pid(pid);
+	kill_pid(p, SIGKILL, 1);
+	put_pid(p);
+}
+
+static int kunit_uapi_run_executable_in_mount(struct kunit *test, const char *executable,
+						   struct vfsmount *mnt)
+{
+	struct kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_ctx ctx = {
+		.setup_done	= COMPLETION_INITIALIZER_ONSTACK(ctx.setup_done),
+		.executable	= executable,
+		.pwd		= {
+			.mnt	= mnt,
+			.dentry	= mnt->mnt_root,
+		},
+	};
+	int forward_err, wait_err, ret;
+	pid_t pid;
+
+	/* If SIGCHLD is ignored do_wait won't populate the status. */
+	kernel_sigaction(SIGCHLD, SIG_DFL);
+	pid = user_mode_thread(kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_init, &ctx, SIGCHLD);
+	if (pid < 0) {
+		kernel_sigaction(SIGCHLD, SIG_IGN);
+		return pid;
+	}
+
+	wait_for_completion(&ctx.setup_done);
+
+	forward_err = kunit_uapi_forward_to_printk(test, ctx.out);
+	if (forward_err)
+		kunit_uapi_kill_pid(ctx.tgid);
+
+	wait_err = kernel_wait(ctx.tgid, &ret);
+
+	/* Restore default kernel sig handler */
+	kernel_sigaction(SIGCHLD, SIG_IGN);
+
+	if (ctx.exec_err)
+		return ctx.exec_err;
+	if (forward_err)
+		return forward_err;
+	if (wait_err < 0)
+		return wait_err;
+	return ret;
+}
+
+static int kunit_uapi_run_executable(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *executable)
+{
+	const char *exe_name = kbasename(executable->path);
+	struct vfsmount *mnt;
+	int err;
+
+	mnt = kunit_uapi_mount_ramfs();
+	if (IS_ERR(mnt))
+		return PTR_ERR(mnt);
+
+	err = kunit_uapi_write_file(mnt, exe_name, 0755, executable->data, blob_size(executable));
+
+	if (!err)
+		err = kunit_uapi_run_executable_in_mount(test, exe_name, mnt);
+
+	kern_unmount(mnt);
+
+	return err;
+}
+
+void kunit_uapi_run_kselftest(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *executable)
+{
+	u8 exit_code, exit_signal;
+	int err;
+
+	err = kunit_uapi_run_executable(test, executable);
+	if (err < 0)
+		KUNIT_FAIL(test, "Could not run test executable: %pe\n", ERR_PTR(err));
+
+	exit_code = err >> 8;
+	exit_signal = err & 0xff;
+
+	if (exit_signal)
+		KUNIT_FAIL(test, "kselftest exited with signal: %d\n", exit_signal);
+	else if (exit_code == KSFT_PASS)
+		; /* Noop */
+	else if (exit_code == KSFT_FAIL)
+		KUNIT_FAIL(test, "kselftest exited with code KSFT_FAIL\n");
+	else if (exit_code == KSFT_XPASS)
+		KUNIT_FAIL(test, "kselftest exited with code KSFT_XPASS\n");
+	else if (exit_code == KSFT_XFAIL)
+		; /* Noop */
+	else if (exit_code == KSFT_SKIP)
+		kunit_mark_skipped(test, "kselftest exited with code KSFT_SKIP\n");
+	else
+		KUNIT_FAIL(test, "kselftest exited with unknown exit code: %d\n", exit_code);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_uapi_run_kselftest);

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 13/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 15658 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Enable running UAPI tests as part of kunit.
> The selftests are embedded into the kernel image and their output is
> forwarded to kunit for unified reporting.
>
> The implementation reuses parts of usermode drivers and usermode
> helpers. However these frameworks are not used directly as they make it
> impossible to retrieve a thread's exit code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
>
> ---

It feels to me like there are three features hidden in here:
- KUnit helpers for manipulating vfs files
- A way of having KUnit tests run userspace helpers
- The full framework for writing/running whole tests in userspace.

It's really the first two which excite me personally most -- as they
give us a sort-of inverse to the kselftest "helper module" paradigm --
so we can test things which are impossible to test from within
kernelspace. So maybe those APIs should be exposed separately (so a
test can be written mostly in kernel-space using the KUnit framework
APIs, and just call out to a helper where needed). But I'm happy for
them to stay private functions until we have a test which actually
needs them.


> Currently this depends on CONFIG_KUNIT=y as it uses some non-exported
> symbols around process management.

That's fine for now, IMHO, but will make it difficult to use this on,
e.g., Red Hat setups, where CONFIG_KUNIT=m. Hopefully we can resolve
this by exporting some of the symbols?


In general, I'm happy with the implementation here. The fs stuff
probably needs a closer look from someone who knows the vfs better
than me, though.

Nevertheless,
Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

Cheers,
-- David

> ---
>  Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst |   5 +
>  Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst  |  12 ++
>  include/kunit/uapi.h                        |  24 +++
>  lib/kunit/Kconfig                           |  10 +
>  lib/kunit/Makefile                          |   2 +
>  lib/kunit/uapi.c                            | 287 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  6 files changed, 340 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst
> index 5cdb552a0808f25baeff5e47a9227b7b62c69e40..34d8fee9a97059d6da919a6fb1a7e359b5e0beef 100644
> --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst
> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ API Reference
>         test
>         resource
>         functionredirection
> +       uapi
>         clk
>         of
>         platformdevice
> @@ -32,6 +33,10 @@ Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/functionredirection.rst
>
>   - Documents the KUnit Function Redirection API
>
> +Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst
> +
> + - Documents the KUnit Userspace testing API
> +
>  Driver KUnit API
>  ================
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b4764424c629bf69194cf2786f52aef154b02bf8
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst
> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +
> +==================
> +Userspace Test API
> +==================
> +
> +This file documents all of the userspace testing API.
> +Userspace tests should be built as :ref:`userprogs <kbuild_userprogs>` and included into the test
> +module or kernel as :ref:`blobs <kbuild_blobs>`.
> +
> +.. kernel-doc:: include/kunit/uapi.h
> +   :internal:
> diff --git a/include/kunit/uapi.h b/include/kunit/uapi.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a6181790c96a42df05839097991c1fbfd889cdbe
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/kunit/uapi.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +/*
> + * KUnit Userspace testing API.
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2025, Linutronix GmbH.
> + * Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef _KUNIT_UAPI_H
> +#define _KUNIT_UAPI_H
> +
> +struct blob;
> +struct kunit;
> +
> +/**
> + * kunit_uapi_run_kselftest() - Run a userspace kselftest as part of kunit
> + * @test: The test context object.
> + * @executable: kselftest executable to run
> + *
> + * Runs the kselftest and forwards its TAP output and exit status to kunit.
> + */
> +void kunit_uapi_run_kselftest(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *executable);
> +
> +#endif /* _KUNIT_UAPI_H */
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/Kconfig b/lib/kunit/Kconfig
> index a97897edd9642f3e5df7fdd9dee26ee5cf00d6a4..1f2f5f2213a7d8438cd2683955f22e34f3a036dd 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/Kconfig
> +++ b/lib/kunit/Kconfig
> @@ -93,4 +93,14 @@ config KUNIT_AUTORUN_ENABLED
>           In most cases this should be left as Y. Only if additional opt-in
>           behavior is needed should this be set to N.
>
> +config KUNIT_UAPI
> +       def_bool y

Maybe it's worth making this configurable separately? I could imagine
people wanting an easy way to build a kernel without all of the test
blobs built-in.

> +       depends on KUNIT=y
> +       depends on CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC || ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC
> +       select HEADERS_INSTALL
> +       help
> +         Enables support for building and running userspace selftests as part of kunit.
> +         These tests should be statically linked and use kselftest.h or kselftest_harness.h
> +         for status reporting.
> +
>  endif # KUNIT
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/Makefile b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> index 656f1fa35abcc635e67d5b4cb1bc586b48415ac5..dafa09bd4241c24d31c4c19edecb67bf724127d7 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ kunit-objs +=                         test.o \
>                                         device.o \
>                                         platform.o
>
> +kunit-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI) +=          uapi.o
> +
>  ifeq ($(CONFIG_KUNIT_DEBUGFS),y)
>  kunit-objs +=                          debugfs.o
>  endif
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/uapi.c b/lib/kunit/uapi.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..121146dda533b3f90aca37c20bd0e7a1d20cb3b5
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/kunit/uapi.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,287 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * KUnit Userspace testing API.
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2025, Linutronix GmbH.
> + * Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/binfmts.h>
> +#include <linux/blob.h>
> +#include <linux/file.h>
> +#include <linux/fs.h>
> +#include <linux/fs_struct.h>
> +#include <linux/pid.h>
> +#include <linux/pipe_fs_i.h>
> +#include <linux/sched/task.h>
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +
> +#include <kunit/test.h>
> +#include <kunit/uapi.h>
> +
> +#define KSFT_PASS      0
> +#define KSFT_FAIL      1
> +#define KSFT_XFAIL     2
> +#define KSFT_XPASS     3
> +#define KSFT_SKIP      4
> +
> +static struct vfsmount *kunit_uapi_mount_ramfs(void)
> +{
> +       struct file_system_type *type;
> +       struct vfsmount *mnt;
> +
> +       type = get_fs_type("ramfs");
> +       if (!type)
> +               return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
> +
> +       /* FIXME
> +        * The mount setup is supposed to look like this:
> +        * kunit_uapi_mount_ramfs() sets up a private mount,
> +        * with nothing visible except the new tmpfs.
> +        * Then each executable execution gets a new namespace on top of that
> +        * on which it can mount whatever it needs.
> +        * However I didn't manage to set this up, so keep everything simple
> +        * for now and let somebody familiar with the VFS figure this out.
> +        */
> +
> +       mnt = kern_mount(type);
> +       put_filesystem(type);
> +
> +       return mnt;
> +}
> +
> +static int kunit_uapi_write_file(struct vfsmount *mnt, const char *name, mode_t mode,
> +                                const u8 *data, size_t size)
> +{
> +       struct file *file;
> +       ssize_t written;
> +
> +       file = file_open_root_mnt(mnt, name, O_CREAT | O_WRONLY, mode);
> +       if (IS_ERR(file))
> +               return PTR_ERR(file);
> +
> +       written = kernel_write(file, data, size, NULL);
> +       filp_close(file, NULL);
> +       if (written != size) {
> +               if (written >= 0)
> +                       return -ENOMEM;
> +               return written;
> +       }
> +
> +       /* Flush delayed fput so exec can open the file read-only */
> +       flush_delayed_fput();
> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +struct kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_ctx {
> +       const char *executable;
> +
> +       /* Signals mnt, out, pwd and tgid */
> +       struct completion setup_done;
> +       struct vfsmount *mnt;
> +       struct file *out;
> +       struct path pwd;
> +       pid_t tgid;
> +
> +       /* Valid after wait(tgid) */
> +       int exec_err;
> +};
> +
> +static int kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_init(void *data)
> +{
> +       struct kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_ctx *ctx = data;
> +       const char *const argv[] = {
> +               ctx->executable,
> +               NULL
> +       };
> +       struct file *out[2];
> +       int err;
> +
> +       err = create_pipe_files(out, 0);
> +       if (err)
> +               return err;
> +
> +       /* stdin, use the *write* end to the pipe to have an unreadable input */
> +       err = replace_fd(0, out[1], 0);
> +       if (err < 0) {
> +               fput(out[0]);
> +               fput(out[1]);
> +               return err;
> +       }
> +
> +       /* stdout */
> +       err = replace_fd(1, out[1], 0);
> +       if (err < 0) {
> +               replace_fd(0, NULL, 0);
> +               fput(out[0]);
> +               fput(out[1]);
> +               return err;
> +       }
> +
> +       /* stderr */
> +       err = replace_fd(2, out[1], 0);
> +       if (err < 0) {
> +               replace_fd(0, NULL, 0);
> +               replace_fd(1, NULL, 0);
> +               fput(out[0]);
> +               fput(out[1]);
> +               return err;
> +       }
> +
> +       fput(out[1]);
> +
> +       ctx->out = out[0];
> +       ctx->tgid = current->tgid;
> +
> +       set_fs_pwd(current->fs, &ctx->pwd);
> +       kernel_sigaction(SIGKILL, SIG_DFL);
> +       kernel_sigaction(SIGABRT, SIG_DFL);
> +
> +       complete(&ctx->setup_done);
> +       ctx->exec_err = kernel_execve(ctx->executable, argv, NULL);
> +       if (!ctx->exec_err)
> +               return 0;
> +       do_exit(0);
> +}
> +
> +static size_t kunit_uapi_printk_subtest_lines(struct kunit *test, char *buf, size_t s)
> +{
> +       const char *ptr = buf, *newline;
> +       size_t n;
> +
> +       while (s) {
> +               newline = strnchr(ptr, s, '\n');
> +               if (!newline)
> +                       break;
> +
> +               n = newline - ptr + 1;
> +
> +               kunit_log(KERN_INFO, test, KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT "%.*s", (int)n, ptr);
> +               ptr += n;
> +               s -= n;
> +       }
> +
> +       memmove(buf, ptr, s);
> +
> +       return s;
> +}
> +
> +static int kunit_uapi_forward_to_printk(struct kunit *test, struct file *output)
> +{
> +       /*
> +        * printk() automatically adds a newline after each message.
> +        * Therefore only fully accumulated lines can be forwarded.
> +        * Each line needs to fit into the buffer below.
> +        */
> +       char buf[512];
> +       size_t s = 0;
> +       ssize_t n;
> +
> +       while (1) {
> +               n = kernel_read(output, buf + s, sizeof(buf) - s, NULL);
> +               if (n <= 0)
> +                       return n;
> +               s = kunit_uapi_printk_subtest_lines(test, buf, s + n);
> +       }
> +}
> +
> +static void kunit_uapi_kill_pid(pid_t pid)
> +{
> +       struct pid *p;
> +
> +       p = find_get_pid(pid);
> +       kill_pid(p, SIGKILL, 1);
> +       put_pid(p);
> +}
> +
> +static int kunit_uapi_run_executable_in_mount(struct kunit *test, const char *executable,
> +                                                  struct vfsmount *mnt)
> +{
> +       struct kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_ctx ctx = {
> +               .setup_done     = COMPLETION_INITIALIZER_ONSTACK(ctx.setup_done),
> +               .executable     = executable,
> +               .pwd            = {
> +                       .mnt    = mnt,
> +                       .dentry = mnt->mnt_root,
> +               },
> +       };
> +       int forward_err, wait_err, ret;
> +       pid_t pid;
> +
> +       /* If SIGCHLD is ignored do_wait won't populate the status. */
> +       kernel_sigaction(SIGCHLD, SIG_DFL);
> +       pid = user_mode_thread(kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_init, &ctx, SIGCHLD);
> +       if (pid < 0) {
> +               kernel_sigaction(SIGCHLD, SIG_IGN);
> +               return pid;
> +       }
> +
> +       wait_for_completion(&ctx.setup_done);
> +
> +       forward_err = kunit_uapi_forward_to_printk(test, ctx.out);
> +       if (forward_err)
> +               kunit_uapi_kill_pid(ctx.tgid);
> +
> +       wait_err = kernel_wait(ctx.tgid, &ret);
> +
> +       /* Restore default kernel sig handler */
> +       kernel_sigaction(SIGCHLD, SIG_IGN);
> +
> +       if (ctx.exec_err)
> +               return ctx.exec_err;
> +       if (forward_err)
> +               return forward_err;
> +       if (wait_err < 0)
> +               return wait_err;
> +       return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int kunit_uapi_run_executable(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *executable)
> +{
> +       const char *exe_name = kbasename(executable->path);
> +       struct vfsmount *mnt;
> +       int err;
> +
> +       mnt = kunit_uapi_mount_ramfs();
> +       if (IS_ERR(mnt))
> +               return PTR_ERR(mnt);
> +
> +       err = kunit_uapi_write_file(mnt, exe_name, 0755, executable->data, blob_size(executable));
> +
> +       if (!err)
> +               err = kunit_uapi_run_executable_in_mount(test, exe_name, mnt);
> +
> +       kern_unmount(mnt);
> +
> +       return err;
> +}
> +
> +void kunit_uapi_run_kselftest(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *executable)
> +{
> +       u8 exit_code, exit_signal;
> +       int err;
> +
> +       err = kunit_uapi_run_executable(test, executable);
> +       if (err < 0)
> +               KUNIT_FAIL(test, "Could not run test executable: %pe\n", ERR_PTR(err));
> +
> +       exit_code = err >> 8;
> +       exit_signal = err & 0xff;
> +
> +       if (exit_signal)
> +               KUNIT_FAIL(test, "kselftest exited with signal: %d\n", exit_signal);
> +       else if (exit_code == KSFT_PASS)
> +               ; /* Noop */
> +       else if (exit_code == KSFT_FAIL)
> +               KUNIT_FAIL(test, "kselftest exited with code KSFT_FAIL\n");
> +       else if (exit_code == KSFT_XPASS)
> +               KUNIT_FAIL(test, "kselftest exited with code KSFT_XPASS\n");
> +       else if (exit_code == KSFT_XFAIL)
> +               ; /* Noop */
> +       else if (exit_code == KSFT_SKIP)
> +               kunit_mark_skipped(test, "kselftest exited with code KSFT_SKIP\n");
> +       else
> +               KUNIT_FAIL(test, "kselftest exited with unknown exit code: %d\n", exit_code);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_uapi_run_kselftest);
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v3 13/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 05:47:39PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
> <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Enable running UAPI tests as part of kunit.
> > The selftests are embedded into the kernel image and their output is
> > forwarded to kunit for unified reporting.
> >
> > The implementation reuses parts of usermode drivers and usermode
> > helpers. However these frameworks are not used directly as they make it
> > impossible to retrieve a thread's exit code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> >
> > ---
> 
> It feels to me like there are three features hidden in here:
> - KUnit helpers for manipulating vfs files
> - A way of having KUnit tests run userspace helpers
> - The full framework for writing/running whole tests in userspace.
> 
> It's really the first two which excite me personally most -- as they
> give us a sort-of inverse to the kselftest "helper module" paradigm --
> so we can test things which are impossible to test from within
> kernelspace.

For me it is only the third feature that I really care about right now.
But I do expect users for the first two to pop up at some point and these are
obviously valid usecases.

> So maybe those APIs should be exposed separately (so a
> test can be written mostly in kernel-space using the KUnit framework
> APIs, and just call out to a helper where needed). But I'm happy for
> them to stay private functions until we have a test which actually
> needs them.

Agreed, let's expose it when there are users.

> > Currently this depends on CONFIG_KUNIT=y as it uses some non-exported
> > symbols around process management.
> 
> That's fine for now, IMHO, but will make it difficult to use this on,
> e.g., Red Hat setups, where CONFIG_KUNIT=m. Hopefully we can resolve
> this by exporting some of the symbols?

I'll try to use the new EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL_FOR_MODULES() on these symbols and
see what the maintainers say about it.

> In general, I'm happy with the implementation here. The fs stuff
> probably needs a closer look from someone who knows the vfs better
> than me, though.
> 
> Nevertheless,
> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

Thanks

> 
> Cheers,
> -- David
> 
> > ---
> >  Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst |   5 +
> >  Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst  |  12 ++
> >  include/kunit/uapi.h                        |  24 +++
> >  lib/kunit/Kconfig                           |  10 +
> >  lib/kunit/Makefile                          |   2 +
> >  lib/kunit/uapi.c                            | 287 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  6 files changed, 340 insertions(+)

<snip>

[PATCH v3 14/16] kunit: uapi: Add example for UAPI tests

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Extend the example to show how to run a userspace executable.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 lib/kunit/Makefile             |  9 ++++++++-
 lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
 lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/kunit/Makefile b/lib/kunit/Makefile
index dafa09bd4241c24d31c4c19edecb67bf724127d7..e406a31df1df834a87961663de0b7921b59481c2 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
+++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
@@ -30,4 +30,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) +=		string-stream-test.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) +=		assert_test.o
 endif
 
-obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST) +=	kunit-example-test.o
+userprogs +=				kunit-example-uapi
+kunit-example-uapi-userccflags :=	-static
+kunit-example-uapi-nolibc :=		$(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC)
+blobs +=				kunit-example-uapi.blob.o
+
+obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST) +=	kunit-example-mod.o
+kunit-example-mod-y +=			kunit-example-test.o
+kunit-example-mod-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI) += kunit-example-uapi.blob.o
diff --git a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c
index 3056d6bc705d0a8f196f0f4412e679dbb0e03114..b2681a6e047dfd6fea4a7cca60e81651d09c2eae 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c
@@ -6,8 +6,11 @@
  * Author: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
  */
 
+#include <linux/blob.h>
+
 #include <kunit/test.h>
 #include <kunit/static_stub.h>
+#include <kunit/uapi.h>
 
 /*
  * This is the most fundamental element of KUnit, the test case. A test case
@@ -277,6 +280,17 @@ static void example_slow_test(struct kunit *test)
 	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1 + 1, 2);
 }
 
+/*
+ * This test shows the usage of UAPI tests.
+ */
+static void example_uapi_test(struct kunit *test)
+{
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI))
+		kunit_uapi_run_kselftest(test, BLOB(kunit_example_uapi));
+	else
+		kunit_skip(test, "CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI is not enabled");
+}
+
 /*
  * Here we make a list of all the test cases we want to add to the test suite
  * below.
@@ -297,6 +311,7 @@ static struct kunit_case example_test_cases[] = {
 	KUNIT_CASE(example_priv_test),
 	KUNIT_CASE_PARAM(example_params_test, example_gen_params),
 	KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(example_slow_test),
+	KUNIT_CASE(example_uapi_test),
 	{}
 };
 
diff --git a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4ce657050dd4a576632a41ca0309c4cb5134ce14
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * KUnit Userspace example test.
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2025, Linutronix GmbH.
+ * Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
+ *
+ * This is *userspace* code.
+ */
+
+#include "../../tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h"
+
+int main(void)
+{
+	ksft_print_header();
+	ksft_set_plan(4);
+	ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 1\n");
+	ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 2\n");
+	ksft_test_result_skip("userspace test 3: some reason\n");
+	ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 4\n");
+	ksft_finished();
+}

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 14/16] kunit: uapi: Add example for UAPI tests

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3826 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Extend the example to show how to run a userspace executable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

Cheers,
-- David



>  lib/kunit/Makefile             |  9 ++++++++-
>  lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
>  lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/Makefile b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> index dafa09bd4241c24d31c4c19edecb67bf724127d7..e406a31df1df834a87961663de0b7921b59481c2 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> @@ -30,4 +30,11 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) +=          string-stream-test.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_TEST) +=            assert_test.o
>  endif
>
> -obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST) +=    kunit-example-test.o
> +userprogs +=                           kunit-example-uapi
> +kunit-example-uapi-userccflags :=      -static
> +kunit-example-uapi-nolibc :=           $(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC)
> +blobs +=                               kunit-example-uapi.blob.o
> +
> +obj-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_EXAMPLE_TEST) +=    kunit-example-mod.o
> +kunit-example-mod-y +=                 kunit-example-test.o
> +kunit-example-mod-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI) += kunit-example-uapi.blob.o
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c
> index 3056d6bc705d0a8f196f0f4412e679dbb0e03114..b2681a6e047dfd6fea4a7cca60e81651d09c2eae 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c
> +++ b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c
> @@ -6,8 +6,11 @@
>   * Author: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
>   */
>
> +#include <linux/blob.h>
> +
>  #include <kunit/test.h>
>  #include <kunit/static_stub.h>
> +#include <kunit/uapi.h>
>
>  /*
>   * This is the most fundamental element of KUnit, the test case. A test case
> @@ -277,6 +280,17 @@ static void example_slow_test(struct kunit *test)
>         KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 1 + 1, 2);
>  }
>
> +/*
> + * This test shows the usage of UAPI tests.
> + */
> +static void example_uapi_test(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI))
> +               kunit_uapi_run_kselftest(test, BLOB(kunit_example_uapi));
> +       else
> +               kunit_skip(test, "CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI is not enabled");
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * Here we make a list of all the test cases we want to add to the test suite
>   * below.
> @@ -297,6 +311,7 @@ static struct kunit_case example_test_cases[] = {
>         KUNIT_CASE(example_priv_test),
>         KUNIT_CASE_PARAM(example_params_test, example_gen_params),
>         KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(example_slow_test),
> +       KUNIT_CASE(example_uapi_test),
>         {}
>  };
>
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..4ce657050dd4a576632a41ca0309c4cb5134ce14
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * KUnit Userspace example test.
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2025, Linutronix GmbH.
> + * Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> + *
> + * This is *userspace* code.
> + */
> +
> +#include "../../tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h"
> +
> +int main(void)
> +{
> +       ksft_print_header();
> +       ksft_set_plan(4);
> +       ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 1\n");
> +       ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 2\n");
> +       ksft_test_result_skip("userspace test 3: some reason\n");
> +       ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 4\n");
> +       ksft_finished();
> +}
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

[PATCH v3 15/16] kunit: uapi: Introduce preinit executable

[Thomas Weißschuh]

UAPI selftests may expect a "normal" userspace environment.
For example the normal kernel API pseudo-filesystems should be mounted.
This could be done from kernel code but it is non-idiomatic.

Add a preinit userspace executable which performs these setup steps
before running the final test executable.
This preinit executable is only ever run from the kernel.
Give it access to autoconf.h and kconfig.h to adapt itself to the
tested kernel.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 lib/kunit/Makefile       |  9 ++++++-
 lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 lib/kunit/uapi.c         | 11 +++++++--
 3 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/kunit/Makefile b/lib/kunit/Makefile
index e406a31df1df834a87961663de0b7921b59481c2..19493ec320c61e2ccbb58e8b2e943e9a4ec447e2 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
+++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
@@ -12,7 +12,14 @@ kunit-objs +=				test.o \
 					device.o \
 					platform.o
 
-kunit-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI) +=		uapi.o
+userprogs +=				uapi-preinit
+uapi-preinit-nolibc :=			$(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC)
+uapi-preinit-userccflags +=		-static \
+					-include include/generated/autoconf.h \
+					-include $(srctree)/tools/include/linux/kconfig.h
+blobs +=				uapi-preinit.blob.o
+uapi-preinit.blob-symbol :=		kunit_uapi_preinit
+kunit-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI) +=		uapi.o uapi-preinit.blob.o
 
 ifeq ($(CONFIG_KUNIT_DEBUGFS),y)
 kunit-objs +=				debugfs.o
diff --git a/lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c b/lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..81182039965a8c93aebb2d5d76f4113bfef277a6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * KUnit Userspace environment setup.
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2025, Linutronix GmbH.
+ * Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
+ *
+ * This is *userspace* code.
+ */
+
+#include <sys/mount.h>
+#include <sys/stat.h>
+
+#include "../../tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h"
+
+static int setup_api_mount(const char *target, const char *fstype)
+{
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = mkdir(target, 0755);
+	if (ret && errno != EEXIST)
+		return -errno;
+
+	ret = mount("none", target, fstype, 0, NULL);
+	if (ret && errno != EBUSY)
+		return -errno;
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static void exit_failure(const char *stage, int err)
+{
+	/* If preinit fails synthesize a failed test report. */
+	ksft_print_header();
+	ksft_set_plan(1);
+	ksft_test_result_fail("Failed during test setup: %s: %s\n", stage, strerror(-err));
+	ksft_finished();
+}
+
+int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
+{
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = setup_api_mount("/proc", "proc");
+	if (ret)
+		exit_failure("mount /proc", ret);
+
+	ret = setup_api_mount("/sys", "sysfs");
+	if (ret)
+		exit_failure("mount /sys", ret);
+
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVTMPFS)) {
+		ret = setup_api_mount("/dev", "devtmpfs");
+		if (ret)
+			exit_failure("mount /dev", ret);
+	}
+
+	ret = execve(argv[0], argv, envp);
+	if (ret)
+		exit_failure("execve", ret);
+
+	return 0;
+}
diff --git a/lib/kunit/uapi.c b/lib/kunit/uapi.c
index 121146dda533b3f90aca37c20bd0e7a1d20cb3b5..bccc081a6538507724c1ef340203cfd147170dc4 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/uapi.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/uapi.c
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ static int kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_init(void *data)
 	kernel_sigaction(SIGABRT, SIG_DFL);
 
 	complete(&ctx->setup_done);
-	ctx->exec_err = kernel_execve(ctx->executable, argv, NULL);
+	ctx->exec_err = kernel_execve(kbasename(BLOB(kunit_uapi_preinit)->path), argv, NULL);
 	if (!ctx->exec_err)
 		return 0;
 	do_exit(0);
@@ -239,6 +239,7 @@ static int kunit_uapi_run_executable_in_mount(struct kunit *test, const char *ex
 
 static int kunit_uapi_run_executable(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *executable)
 {
+	const struct blob *preinit = BLOB(kunit_uapi_preinit);
 	const char *exe_name = kbasename(executable->path);
 	struct vfsmount *mnt;
 	int err;
@@ -247,7 +248,13 @@ static int kunit_uapi_run_executable(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *exec
 	if (IS_ERR(mnt))
 		return PTR_ERR(mnt);
 
-	err = kunit_uapi_write_file(mnt, exe_name, 0755, executable->data, blob_size(executable));
+	err = kunit_uapi_write_file(mnt, kbasename(preinit->path), 0755,
+				    preinit->data,
+				    blob_size(preinit));
+
+	if (!err)
+		err = kunit_uapi_write_file(mnt, exe_name, 0755,
+					    executable->data, blob_size(executable));
 
 	if (!err)
 		err = kunit_uapi_run_executable_in_mount(test, exe_name, mnt);

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 15/16] kunit: uapi: Introduce preinit executable

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5985 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> UAPI selftests may expect a "normal" userspace environment.
> For example the normal kernel API pseudo-filesystems should be mounted.
> This could be done from kernel code but it is non-idiomatic.
>
> Add a preinit userspace executable which performs these setup steps
> before running the final test executable.
> This preinit executable is only ever run from the kernel.
> Give it access to autoconf.h and kconfig.h to adapt itself to the
> tested kernel.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---

Looks good and works here.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

(Although, personally, _I wish_ it were more idiomatic to mount things
from kernelspace.)

Cheers,
-- David


>  lib/kunit/Makefile       |  9 ++++++-
>  lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  lib/kunit/uapi.c         | 11 +++++++--
>  3 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/Makefile b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> index e406a31df1df834a87961663de0b7921b59481c2..19493ec320c61e2ccbb58e8b2e943e9a4ec447e2 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/kunit/Makefile
> @@ -12,7 +12,14 @@ kunit-objs +=                                test.o \
>                                         device.o \
>                                         platform.o
>
> -kunit-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI) +=          uapi.o
> +userprogs +=                           uapi-preinit
> +uapi-preinit-nolibc :=                 $(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC)
> +uapi-preinit-userccflags +=            -static \
> +                                       -include include/generated/autoconf.h \
> +                                       -include $(srctree)/tools/include/linux/kconfig.h
> +blobs +=                               uapi-preinit.blob.o
> +uapi-preinit.blob-symbol :=            kunit_uapi_preinit
> +kunit-$(CONFIG_KUNIT_UAPI) +=          uapi.o uapi-preinit.blob.o
>
>  ifeq ($(CONFIG_KUNIT_DEBUGFS),y)
>  kunit-objs +=                          debugfs.o
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c b/lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..81182039965a8c93aebb2d5d76f4113bfef277a6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * KUnit Userspace environment setup.
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2025, Linutronix GmbH.
> + * Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> + *
> + * This is *userspace* code.
> + */
> +
> +#include <sys/mount.h>
> +#include <sys/stat.h>
> +
> +#include "../../tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h"
> +
> +static int setup_api_mount(const char *target, const char *fstype)
> +{
> +       int ret;
> +
> +       ret = mkdir(target, 0755);
> +       if (ret && errno != EEXIST)
> +               return -errno;
> +
> +       ret = mount("none", target, fstype, 0, NULL);
> +       if (ret && errno != EBUSY)
> +               return -errno;
> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void exit_failure(const char *stage, int err)
> +{
> +       /* If preinit fails synthesize a failed test report. */
> +       ksft_print_header();
> +       ksft_set_plan(1);
> +       ksft_test_result_fail("Failed during test setup: %s: %s\n", stage, strerror(-err));
> +       ksft_finished();
> +}
> +
> +int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
> +{
> +       int ret;
> +
> +       ret = setup_api_mount("/proc", "proc");
> +       if (ret)
> +               exit_failure("mount /proc", ret);
> +
> +       ret = setup_api_mount("/sys", "sysfs");
> +       if (ret)
> +               exit_failure("mount /sys", ret);
> +
> +       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEVTMPFS)) {
> +               ret = setup_api_mount("/dev", "devtmpfs");
> +               if (ret)
> +                       exit_failure("mount /dev", ret);
> +       }
> +
> +       ret = execve(argv[0], argv, envp);
> +       if (ret)
> +               exit_failure("execve", ret);
> +
> +       return 0;
> +}
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/uapi.c b/lib/kunit/uapi.c
> index 121146dda533b3f90aca37c20bd0e7a1d20cb3b5..bccc081a6538507724c1ef340203cfd147170dc4 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/uapi.c
> +++ b/lib/kunit/uapi.c
> @@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ static int kunit_uapi_user_mode_thread_init(void *data)
>         kernel_sigaction(SIGABRT, SIG_DFL);
>
>         complete(&ctx->setup_done);
> -       ctx->exec_err = kernel_execve(ctx->executable, argv, NULL);
> +       ctx->exec_err = kernel_execve(kbasename(BLOB(kunit_uapi_preinit)->path), argv, NULL);
>         if (!ctx->exec_err)
>                 return 0;
>         do_exit(0);
> @@ -239,6 +239,7 @@ static int kunit_uapi_run_executable_in_mount(struct kunit *test, const char *ex
>
>  static int kunit_uapi_run_executable(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *executable)
>  {
> +       const struct blob *preinit = BLOB(kunit_uapi_preinit);
>         const char *exe_name = kbasename(executable->path);
>         struct vfsmount *mnt;
>         int err;
> @@ -247,7 +248,13 @@ static int kunit_uapi_run_executable(struct kunit *test, const struct blob *exec
>         if (IS_ERR(mnt))
>                 return PTR_ERR(mnt);
>
> -       err = kunit_uapi_write_file(mnt, exe_name, 0755, executable->data, blob_size(executable));
> +       err = kunit_uapi_write_file(mnt, kbasename(preinit->path), 0755,
> +                                   preinit->data,
> +                                   blob_size(preinit));
> +
> +       if (!err)
> +               err = kunit_uapi_write_file(mnt, exe_name, 0755,
> +                                           executable->data, blob_size(executable));
>
>         if (!err)
>                 err = kunit_uapi_run_executable_in_mount(test, exe_name, mnt);
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

[PATCH v3 16/16] kunit: uapi: Validate usability of /proc

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Show that the selftests are executed from a fairly "normal"
userspace context.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
 lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
index 4ce657050dd4a576632a41ca0309c4cb5134ce14..5e7a0f3b68f182c42b03e667567e66f02d8c2b86 100644
--- a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
+++ b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
@@ -8,13 +8,45 @@
  * This is *userspace* code.
  */
 
+#include <fcntl.h>
+#include <unistd.h>
+#include <string.h>
+
 #include "../../tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h"
 
+static void test_procfs(void)
+{
+	char buf[256];
+	ssize_t r;
+	int fd;
+
+	fd = open("/proc/self/comm", O_RDONLY);
+	if (fd == -1) {
+		ksft_test_result_fail("procfs: open() failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
+		return;
+	}
+
+	r = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf));
+	close(fd);
+
+	if (r == -1) {
+		ksft_test_result_fail("procfs: read() failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
+		return;
+	}
+
+	if (r != 16 || strncmp("kunit-example-u\n", buf, 16) != 0) {
+		ksft_test_result_fail("procfs: incorrect comm\n");
+		return;
+	}
+
+	ksft_test_result_pass("procfs\n");
+}
+
 int main(void)
 {
 	ksft_print_header();
 	ksft_set_plan(4);
-	ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 1\n");
+	test_procfs();
 	ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 2\n");
 	ksft_test_result_skip("userspace test 3: some reason\n");
 	ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 4\n");

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v3 16/16] kunit: uapi: Validate usability of /proc

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2989 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Show that the selftests are executed from a fairly "normal"
> userspace context.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---

This is good. I'm not 100% sure the example test is the best place for
it, though.

Would it make more sense to either have this:
- in the main kunit test (since it's really _verifying_ the KUnit
environment, rather than documenting it)
- in a separate kunit-uapi test (if we want to keep some separation
between the UAPI and entirely in-kernel tests)
- in a separate procfs test (since it tests procfs functionality as
much as it's testing the KUnit environment)

Personally, my gut feeling is the main kunit-test is the best place
for this, even if it means spinning up a separate file is best here.

As for the actual implementation, though, that looks fine to me. A few
small comments below, but nothing particularly important.

Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>

Cheers,
-- David

>  lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
> index 4ce657050dd4a576632a41ca0309c4cb5134ce14..5e7a0f3b68f182c42b03e667567e66f02d8c2b86 100644
> --- a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
> +++ b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
> @@ -8,13 +8,45 @@
>   * This is *userspace* code.
>   */
>
> +#include <fcntl.h>
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +#include <string.h>
> +
>  #include "../../tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h"
>
> +static void test_procfs(void)
> +{
> +       char buf[256];
> +       ssize_t r;
> +       int fd;
> +
> +       fd = open("/proc/self/comm", O_RDONLY);
> +       if (fd == -1) {
> +               ksft_test_result_fail("procfs: open() failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
> +               return;
> +       }
> +
> +       r = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf));
> +       close(fd);
> +
> +       if (r == -1) {
> +               ksft_test_result_fail("procfs: read() failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
> +               return;
> +       }
> +

Do we want to use TASK_COMM_LEN rather than hardcoding 16 below?

(And, if so, do we need something more complicated in case it's not 16?)


> +       if (r != 16 || strncmp("kunit-example-u\n", buf, 16) != 0) {
> +               ksft_test_result_fail("procfs: incorrect comm\n");
> +               return;
> +       }
> +
> +       ksft_test_result_pass("procfs\n");
> +}
> +
>  int main(void)
>  {
>         ksft_print_header();
>         ksft_set_plan(4);
> -       ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 1\n");
> +       test_procfs();
>         ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 2\n");
>         ksft_test_result_skip("userspace test 3: some reason\n");
>         ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 4\n");
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v3 16/16] kunit: uapi: Validate usability of /proc

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 05:48:07PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
> <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Show that the selftests are executed from a fairly "normal"
> > userspace context.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > ---
> 
> This is good. I'm not 100% sure the example test is the best place for
> it, though.
> 
> Would it make more sense to either have this:
> - in the main kunit test (since it's really _verifying_ the KUnit
> environment, rather than documenting it)
> - in a separate kunit-uapi test (if we want to keep some separation
> between the UAPI and entirely in-kernel tests)
> - in a separate procfs test (since it tests procfs functionality as
> much as it's testing the KUnit environment)

Originally this change was really meant as an example for users.
But moving it into the main kunit test probably makes more sense.

> Personally, my gut feeling is the main kunit-test is the best place
> for this, even if it means spinning up a separate file is best here.

Ack.

> As for the actual implementation, though, that looks fine to me. A few
> small comments below, but nothing particularly important.
> 
> Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> 
> Cheers,
> -- David
> 
> >  lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
> > index 4ce657050dd4a576632a41ca0309c4cb5134ce14..5e7a0f3b68f182c42b03e667567e66f02d8c2b86 100644
> > --- a/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
> > +++ b/lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c
> > @@ -8,13 +8,45 @@
> >   * This is *userspace* code.
> >   */
> >
> > +#include <fcntl.h>
> > +#include <unistd.h>
> > +#include <string.h>
> > +
> >  #include "../../tools/testing/selftests/kselftest.h"
> >
> > +static void test_procfs(void)
> > +{
> > +       char buf[256];
> > +       ssize_t r;
> > +       int fd;
> > +
> > +       fd = open("/proc/self/comm", O_RDONLY);
> > +       if (fd == -1) {
> > +               ksft_test_result_fail("procfs: open() failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
> > +               return;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       r = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf));
> > +       close(fd);
> > +
> > +       if (r == -1) {
> > +               ksft_test_result_fail("procfs: read() failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
> > +               return;
> > +       }
> > +
> 
> Do we want to use TASK_COMM_LEN rather than hardcoding 16 below?

> (And, if so, do we need something more complicated in case it's not 16?)

TASK_COMM_LEN is not part of the UAPI headers.
But I don't think it can ever change.

> > +       if (r != 16 || strncmp("kunit-example-u\n", buf, 16) != 0) {
> > +               ksft_test_result_fail("procfs: incorrect comm\n");
> > +               return;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       ksft_test_result_pass("procfs\n");
> > +}
> > +
> >  int main(void)
> >  {
> >         ksft_print_header();
> >         ksft_set_plan(4);
> > -       ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 1\n");
> > +       test_procfs();
> >         ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 2\n");
> >         ksft_test_result_skip("userspace test 3: some reason\n");
> >         ksft_test_result_pass("userspace test 4\n");
> >
> > --
> > 2.49.0
> >

Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework

[David Gow]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 9697 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Currently testing of userspace and in-kernel API use two different
> frameworks. kselftests for the userspace ones and Kunit for the
> in-kernel ones. Besides their different scopes, both have different
> strengths and limitations:
>
> Kunit:
> * Tests are normal kernel code.
> * They use the regular kernel toolchain.
> * They can be packaged and distributed as modules conveniently.
>
> Kselftests:
> * Tests are normal userspace code
> * They need a userspace toolchain.
>   A kernel cross toolchain is likely not enough.
> * A fair amout of userland is required to run the tests,
>   which means a full distro or handcrafted rootfs.
> * There is no way to conveniently package and run kselftests with a
>   given kernel image.
> * The kselftests makefiles are not as powerful as regular kbuild.
>   For example they are missing proper header dependency tracking or more
>   complex compiler option modifications.
>
> Therefore kunit is much easier to run against different kernel
> configurations and architectures.
> This series aims to combine kselftests and kunit, avoiding both their
> limitations. It works by compiling the userspace kselftests as part of
> the regular kernel build, embedding them into the kunit kernel or module
> and executing them from there. If the kernel toolchain is not fit to
> produce userspace because of a missing libc, the kernel's own nolibc can
> be used instead.
> The structured TAP output from the kselftest is integrated into the
> kunit KTAP output transparently, the kunit parser can parse the combined
> logs together.
>
> Further room for improvements:
> * Call each test in its completely dedicated namespace
> * Handle additional test files besides the test executable through
>   archives. CPIO, cramfs, etc.
> * Compatibility with kselftest_harness.h (in progress)
> * Expose the blobs in debugfs
> * Provide some convience wrappers around compat userprogs
> * Figure out a migration path/coexistence solution for
>   kunit UAPI and tools/testing/selftests/
>
> Output from the kunit example testcase, note the output of
> "example_uapi_tests".
>
> $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --kunitconfig lib/kunit example
> ...
> Running tests with:
> $ .kunit/linux kunit.filter_glob=example kunit.enable=1 mem=1G console=tty kunit_shutdown=halt
> [11:53:53] ================== example (10 subtests) ===================
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_simple_test
> [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example_skip_test
> [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example_mark_skipped_test
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_all_expect_macros_test
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_static_stub_test
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_static_stub_using_fn_ptr_test
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_priv_test
> [11:53:53] =================== example_params_test  ===================
> [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example value 3
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] example value 2
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] example value 1
> [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example value 0
> [11:53:53] =============== [PASSED] example_params_test ===============
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_slow_test
> [11:53:53] ======================= (4 subtests) =======================
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] procfs
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] userspace test 2
> [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] userspace test 3: some reason
> [11:53:53] [PASSED] userspace test 4
> [11:53:53] ================ [PASSED] example_uapi_test ================
> [11:53:53] ===================== [PASSED] example =====================
> [11:53:53] ============================================================
> [11:53:53] Testing complete. Ran 16 tests: passed: 11, skipped: 5
> [11:53:53] Elapsed time: 67.543s total, 1.823s configuring, 65.655s building, 0.058s running
>
> Based on v6.15-rc1.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> ---
> Changes in v3:
> - Reintroduce CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC
> - Enable CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC for m68k and SPARC
> - Properly handle 'clean' target for userprogs
> - Use ramfs over tmpfs to reduce dependencies
> - Inherit userprogs byte order and ABI from kernel
> - Drop now unnecessary "#ifndef NOLIBC"
> - Pick up review tags
> - Drop usage of __private in blob.h,
>   sparse complains and it is not really necessary
> - Fix execution on loongarch when using clang
> - Drop userprogs libgcc handling, it was ugly and is not yet necessary
> - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250407-kunit-kselftests-v2-0-454114e287fd@linutronix.de
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Rebase onto v6.15-rc1
> - Add documentation and kernel docs
> - Resolve invalid kconfig breakages
> - Drop already applied patch "kbuild: implement CONFIG_HEADERS_INSTALL for Usermode Linux"
> - Drop userprogs CONFIG_WERROR integration, it doesn't need to be part of this series
> - Replace patch prefix "kconfig" with "kbuild"
> - Rename kunit_uapi_run_executable() to kunit_uapi_run_kselftest()
> - Generate private, conflict-free symbols in the blob framework
> - Handle kselftest exit codes
> - Handle SIGABRT
> - Forward output also to kunit debugfs log
> - Install a fd=0 stdin filedescriptor
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250217-kunit-kselftests-v1-0-42b4524c3b0a@linutronix.de
>
> ---


Thanks very much for persisting with this, and sorry for the delayed response.

I've taken quite a liking to it: it'd definitely have made my life
easier more than once.

As a more general wrapping of selftests in KUnit tests, I do think
that there's still some risk of confusion as to when a KUnit UAPI test
makes sense versus a simple selftest. The UAPI tests are definitely
(IMO) easier to build and run, but won't be easier to debug, or to run
on an existing, non-test system as a part of troubleshooting (which
has been a complaint when selftests have been ported to KUnit in the
past).

Nevertheless, I'm pretty happy to have this be a part of KUnit, though
I have three slight reservations:
1. There's no real _user_ of this yet -- save for the small test of
/proc/self/comm in the example -- I'd like to see a real-world test
using this.
2. There's a fair bit of complexity here, and we're already a bit
behind with KUnit reviews. I'd love it if you could commit to helping
maintain the KUnit parts of this in MAINTAINERS.
3. We need to make sure that there's a clear understanding of when to
use this, versus in-kernel KUnit tests, versus kselftest. This'll
probably involve (a) making sure Shuah is on board -- or at least not
strongly opposed, and (b) updating
Documentation/dev-tools/testing-overview.rst.

But thanks very much -- it's working well in my testing here, and
running the tests is very pleasant.

Cheers,
-- David


> Thomas Weißschuh (16):
>       kbuild: userprogs: avoid duplicating of flags inherited from kernel
>       kbuild: userprogs: also inherit byte order and ABI from kernel
>       init: re-add CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC
>       kbuild: userprogs: add nolibc support
>       kbuild: introduce CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC
>       kbuild: doc: add label for userprogs section
>       kbuild: introduce blob framework
>       kunit: tool: Add test for nested test result reporting
>       kunit: tool: Don't overwrite test status based on subtest counts
>       kunit: tool: Parse skipped tests from kselftest.h
>       kunit: Always descend into kunit directory during build
>       kunit: qemu_configs: loongarch: Enable LSX/LSAX
>       kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework
>       kunit: uapi: Add example for UAPI tests
>       kunit: uapi: Introduce preinit executable
>       kunit: uapi: Validate usability of /proc
>
>  Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/index.rst        |   5 +
>  Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/uapi.rst         |  12 +
>  Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst                 |  38 ++-
>  MAINTAINERS                                        |   2 +
>  Makefile                                           |   7 +-
>  include/kunit/uapi.h                               |  24 ++
>  include/linux/blob.h                               |  31 +++
>  init/Kconfig                                       |   7 +
>  lib/Makefile                                       |   4 -
>  lib/kunit/Kconfig                                  |  10 +
>  lib/kunit/Makefile                                 |  20 +-
>  lib/kunit/kunit-example-test.c                     |  15 ++
>  lib/kunit/kunit-example-uapi.c                     |  54 ++++
>  lib/kunit/uapi-preinit.c                           |  63 +++++
>  lib/kunit/uapi.c                                   | 294 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  scripts/Makefile.blobs                             |  19 ++
>  scripts/Makefile.build                             |   6 +
>  scripts/Makefile.clean                             |   2 +-
>  scripts/Makefile.userprogs                         |  13 +-
>  scripts/blob-wrap.c                                |  27 ++
>  tools/include/nolibc/Kconfig.nolibc                |  15 ++
>  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_parser.py                |  13 +-
>  tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py             |   9 +
>  tools/testing/kunit/qemu_configs/loongarch.py      |   2 +
>  .../test_is_test_passed-failure-nested.log         |  10 +
>  .../test_data/test_is_test_passed-kselftest.log    |   3 +-
>  26 files changed, 686 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: f07a3558c4a5d76f3fea004075e5151c4516d055
> change-id: 20241015-kunit-kselftests-56273bc40442
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5281 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] kunit: Introduce UAPI testing framework

[Thomas Weißschuh]

On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 05:37:24PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 at 15:38, Thomas Weißschuh
> <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Currently testing of userspace and in-kernel API use two different
> > frameworks. kselftests for the userspace ones and Kunit for the
> > in-kernel ones. Besides their different scopes, both have different
> > strengths and limitations:
> >
> > Kunit:
> > * Tests are normal kernel code.
> > * They use the regular kernel toolchain.
> > * They can be packaged and distributed as modules conveniently.
> >
> > Kselftests:
> > * Tests are normal userspace code
> > * They need a userspace toolchain.
> >   A kernel cross toolchain is likely not enough.
> > * A fair amout of userland is required to run the tests,
> >   which means a full distro or handcrafted rootfs.
> > * There is no way to conveniently package and run kselftests with a
> >   given kernel image.
> > * The kselftests makefiles are not as powerful as regular kbuild.
> >   For example they are missing proper header dependency tracking or more
> >   complex compiler option modifications.
> >
> > Therefore kunit is much easier to run against different kernel
> > configurations and architectures.
> > This series aims to combine kselftests and kunit, avoiding both their
> > limitations. It works by compiling the userspace kselftests as part of
> > the regular kernel build, embedding them into the kunit kernel or module
> > and executing them from there. If the kernel toolchain is not fit to
> > produce userspace because of a missing libc, the kernel's own nolibc can
> > be used instead.
> > The structured TAP output from the kselftest is integrated into the
> > kunit KTAP output transparently, the kunit parser can parse the combined
> > logs together.
> >
> > Further room for improvements:
> > * Call each test in its completely dedicated namespace
> > * Handle additional test files besides the test executable through
> >   archives. CPIO, cramfs, etc.
> > * Compatibility with kselftest_harness.h (in progress)
> > * Expose the blobs in debugfs
> > * Provide some convience wrappers around compat userprogs
> > * Figure out a migration path/coexistence solution for
> >   kunit UAPI and tools/testing/selftests/
> >
> > Output from the kunit example testcase, note the output of
> > "example_uapi_tests".
> >
> > $ ./tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run --kunitconfig lib/kunit example
> > ...
> > Running tests with:
> > $ .kunit/linux kunit.filter_glob=example kunit.enable=1 mem=1G console=tty kunit_shutdown=halt
> > [11:53:53] ================== example (10 subtests) ===================
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_simple_test
> > [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example_skip_test
> > [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example_mark_skipped_test
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_all_expect_macros_test
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_static_stub_test
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_static_stub_using_fn_ptr_test
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_priv_test
> > [11:53:53] =================== example_params_test  ===================
> > [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example value 3
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] example value 2
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] example value 1
> > [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] example value 0
> > [11:53:53] =============== [PASSED] example_params_test ===============
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] example_slow_test
> > [11:53:53] ======================= (4 subtests) =======================
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] procfs
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] userspace test 2
> > [11:53:53] [SKIPPED] userspace test 3: some reason
> > [11:53:53] [PASSED] userspace test 4
> > [11:53:53] ================ [PASSED] example_uapi_test ================
> > [11:53:53] ===================== [PASSED] example =====================
> > [11:53:53] ============================================================
> > [11:53:53] Testing complete. Ran 16 tests: passed: 11, skipped: 5
> > [11:53:53] Elapsed time: 67.543s total, 1.823s configuring, 65.655s building, 0.058s running
> >
> > Based on v6.15-rc1.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > ---
> > Changes in v3:
> > - Reintroduce CONFIG_CC_CAN_LINK_STATIC
> > - Enable CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NOLIBC for m68k and SPARC
> > - Properly handle 'clean' target for userprogs
> > - Use ramfs over tmpfs to reduce dependencies
> > - Inherit userprogs byte order and ABI from kernel
> > - Drop now unnecessary "#ifndef NOLIBC"
> > - Pick up review tags
> > - Drop usage of __private in blob.h,
> >   sparse complains and it is not really necessary
> > - Fix execution on loongarch when using clang
> > - Drop userprogs libgcc handling, it was ugly and is not yet necessary
> > - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250407-kunit-kselftests-v2-0-454114e287fd@linutronix.de
> >
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Rebase onto v6.15-rc1
> > - Add documentation and kernel docs
> > - Resolve invalid kconfig breakages
> > - Drop already applied patch "kbuild: implement CONFIG_HEADERS_INSTALL for Usermode Linux"
> > - Drop userprogs CONFIG_WERROR integration, it doesn't need to be part of this series
> > - Replace patch prefix "kconfig" with "kbuild"
> > - Rename kunit_uapi_run_executable() to kunit_uapi_run_kselftest()
> > - Generate private, conflict-free symbols in the blob framework
> > - Handle kselftest exit codes
> > - Handle SIGABRT
> > - Forward output also to kunit debugfs log
> > - Install a fd=0 stdin filedescriptor
> > - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250217-kunit-kselftests-v1-0-42b4524c3b0a@linutronix.de
> >
> > ---
> 
> 
> Thanks very much for persisting with this, and sorry for the delayed response.

Thanks for the review.

> I've taken quite a liking to it: it'd definitely have made my life
> easier more than once.
>
> As a more general wrapping of selftests in KUnit tests, I do think
> that there's still some risk of confusion as to when a KUnit UAPI test
> makes sense versus a simple selftest. The UAPI tests are definitely
> (IMO) easier to build and run, but won't be easier to debug, or to run
> on an existing, non-test system as a part of troubleshooting (which
> has been a complaint when selftests have been ported to KUnit in the
> past).

The tests I am currently running with this framework are actually real
kselftests. They primarily live in tools/testing/selftests/ but I have a
wrapper in the "real" source tree and also build as part of KUnit.
This gives the advantages of both systems.
FWIW, the KUnit UAPI tests still exist as regular binaries in the output
tree and can also be used on their own.

> Nevertheless, I'm pretty happy to have this be a part of KUnit, though
> I have three slight reservations:
> 1. There's no real _user_ of this yet -- save for the small test of
> /proc/self/comm in the example -- I'd like to see a real-world test
> using this.

As mentioned before I am using this with real kselftests.
So far I have plugged in:

* all of tools/testing/selftests/vDSO/
* all of tools/testing/selftests/timens/
* a bit of tools/testing/selftests/x86/
* a bit of tools/testing/selftests/timers/

The selftests require a few small changes but these are mostly to resolve
warnings introduced by the more struct userprogs CFLAGS.
Or make the tests compatible with nolibc by changing syscall constants
from the generic SYS_foo to the Linux UAPI variant __NR_foo.

If you want to take a look at the (very WIP) code:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/thomas.weissschuh/linux.git/log/?h=kunit-kselftests-integration

In addition, some extensions to nolibc and the vDSO selftest libraries were
necessary. But all of that has been upstreamed already.

> 2. There's a fair bit of complexity here, and we're already a bit
> behind with KUnit reviews. I'd love it if you could commit to helping
> maintain the KUnit parts of this in MAINTAINERS.

Ack. I'll add this in the next revision.

> 3. We need to make sure that there's a clear understanding of when to
> use this, versus in-kernel KUnit tests, versus kselftest. This'll
> probably involve (a) making sure Shuah is on board -- or at least not
> strongly opposed, and (b) updating
> Documentation/dev-tools/testing-overview.rst.

As mentioned above, I think for most testcases both can be used from the same
codebase. So far I don't have any other requirements, although I am fairly sure
those will come up at some point. Let's go there when necessary.

I talked to Shuah about the proposal before and she had a positive reaction.
But I still would be very happy to get more feedback from her, also about the
posted patches.

I'll also update testing-overview.rst.

> But thanks very much -- it's working well in my testing here, and
> running the tests is very pleasant.

Good to hear!

<snip>