From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
To: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
davidgow@google.com,
"open list : KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
"kernel@collabora.com" <kernel@collabora.com>
Subject: Re: Converting kselftest test modules to kunit
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 11:04:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <11359c6a-9863-4ffd-8fe4-04b777c72c9f@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202407161005.CACE2E355@keescook>
On 7/16/24 10:59 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 01:11:14PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>> On 7/15/24 9:40 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 03:09:24PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>>>> Hi Kees and All,
>>>>
>>>> There are several tests in kselftest subsystem which load modules to tests
>>>> the internals of the kernel. Most of these test modules are just loaded by
>>>> the kselftest, their status isn't read and reported to the user logs. Hence
>>>> they don't provide benefit of executing those tests.
>>>>
>>>> I've found patches from Kees where he has been converting such kselftests
>>>> to kunit tests [1]. The probable motivation is to move tests output of
>>>> kselftest subsystem which only triggers tests without correctly reporting
>>>> the results. On the other hand, kunit is there to test the kernel's
>>>> internal functions which can't be done by userspace.
>>>>
>>>> Kselftest: Test user facing APIs from userspace
>>>> Kunit: Test kernel's internal functions from kernelspace
>>>
>>> I would say this is a reasonable guide to how these things should
>>> be separated, yes. That said, much of what was kind of ad-hoc kernel
>>> internals testing that was triggered via kselftests is better done via
>>> KUnit these days, but not everything.
>> I started investigated when I found that kselftest doesn't parse the kernel
>> logs to mark these tests pass/fail. (kselftest/lib is good example of it)
>>
>>>
>>>> This brings me to conclusion that kselftest which are loading modules to
>>>> test kernelspace should be converted to kunit tests. I've noted several
>>>> such kselftests.
>>>
>>> I would tend to agree, yes. Which stand out to you? I've mainly been
>>> doing the conversions when I find myself wanting to add new tests, etc.
>> lib
>> test_bitmap
>> prime_numbers
>> test_printf
>> test_scanf
>
> Yeah, these would be nice to convert.
>
>> test_strscpy (already converted, need to remove this test)
>
> Yup, converted in bb8d9b742aa7 ("string: Merge strscpy KUnit tests into string_kunit.c")
>
>> lock
>> test-ww_mutex module
>> net
>> test_blackhole_dev
>
> I don't know these very well, but yeah worth looking into.
>
>> user
>> test_user_copy (probably already converted, need to remove this test)
>
> This is done in -next via cf6219ee889f ("usercopy: Convert test_user_copy to KUnit test")
>
>> firmware
>> test_firmware
>
> This might not work to convert: there's a userspace half for testing
> firmware loading (see the kselftest side...)
>
>> fpu
>> test_fpu
>
> Seems reasonable.
>
>> Most of these modules are found in lib/*.
>>
>> Would it be desired to move these to kunit?
>
> Checking with the authors/maintainer is probably the first thing to do;
> check the git history to see who has been working on them.
>
Also maybe:
mm
gup_test
This is a classic case of testing a kernel API via ioctl into the
kernel, so I think it meets your criteria for moving to KUnit.
Having said that, I must now go try out KUnit in a bit more depth
before I'm sure that this will work out. But it should.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-16 18:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-15 10:09 Converting kselftest test modules to kunit Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-07-15 16:40 ` Kees Cook
2024-07-16 8:11 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-07-16 17:59 ` Kees Cook
2024-07-16 18:04 ` John Hubbard [this message]
2024-07-16 18:26 ` Kees Cook
2024-07-17 21:11 ` John Hubbard
2024-07-17 10:55 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-07-16 7:33 ` David Gow
2024-07-17 10:47 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-07-17 21:44 ` John Hubbard
2024-07-26 19:35 ` Shuah Khan
2024-07-29 7:55 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-07-30 22:55 ` Shuah Khan
2024-07-30 5:23 ` David Gow
2024-07-30 22:53 ` Shuah Khan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=11359c6a-9863-4ffd-8fe4-04b777c72c9f@nvidia.com \
--to=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@collabora.com \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=usama.anjum@collabora.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox