[PATCH v1] rust: bug: add a KUnit test for warn_on!

[PATCH v1] rust: bug: add a KUnit test for warn_on!

[FUJITA Tomonori]

From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@gmail.com>

The test runs warn_on!(false) and warn_on!(true) inside a KUnit warning
suppression block, then checks that one warning was counted. The counter
is incremented by the kernel warning path, not by warn_on! itself, so a
count of one means the warning was really reported.

warn_flags! has a different definition per architecture. The test does not
look at any of them, so it runs on every architecture that supports Rust.

The new CONFIG_RUST_BUG_KUNIT_TEST depends on BUG. With CONFIG_BUG=n,
warn_on! does nothing and no warning is counted.

Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@gmail.com>
---
 rust/kernel/Kconfig.test | 11 +++++++++++
 rust/kernel/bug.rs       | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+)

diff --git a/rust/kernel/Kconfig.test b/rust/kernel/Kconfig.test
index e6a5c7a795f0..966b07872ba1 100644
--- a/rust/kernel/Kconfig.test
+++ b/rust/kernel/Kconfig.test
@@ -83,4 +83,15 @@ config RUST_BITFIELD_KUNIT_TEST
 
 	  If unsure, say N.
 
+config RUST_BUG_KUNIT_TEST
+	bool "KUnit tests for the Rust BUG/WARN functionality" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
+	depends on BUG
+	default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
+	help
+	  This option enables KUnit tests for the Rust BUG/WARN functionality.
+	  These are only for development and testing, not for regular
+	  kernel use cases.
+
+	  If unsure, say N.
+
 endif
diff --git a/rust/kernel/bug.rs b/rust/kernel/bug.rs
index 3566f0234ca4..17adb1b44fe2 100644
--- a/rust/kernel/bug.rs
+++ b/rust/kernel/bug.rs
@@ -152,3 +152,28 @@ macro_rules! warn_on {
         cond
     }};
 }
+
+#[cfg(CONFIG_RUST_BUG_KUNIT_TEST)]
+#[macros::kunit_tests(rust_kernel_bug)]
+mod tests {
+    // The counter is incremented by the kernel warning path, not by `warn_on!`
+    // itself. A count of one means the warning was really reported.
+    #[test]
+    fn test_warn_on() {
+        // SAFETY: `kunit_get_current_test()` is always safe to call (it has
+        // fallbacks for when no KUnit test is running).
+        let test = unsafe { bindings::kunit_get_current_test() };
+        // SAFETY: This function runs only as a KUnit test case, so `test` is a
+        // valid pointer to the running test.
+        let handle = unsafe { bindings::kunit_start_suppress_warning(test) };
+        assert!(!warn_on!(false));
+        assert!(warn_on!(true));
+        // SAFETY: `kunit_suppressed_warning_count()` accepts any value returned by
+        // `kunit_start_suppress_warning()`.
+        let suppressed_count = unsafe { bindings::kunit_suppressed_warning_count(handle) };
+        // SAFETY: `test` is valid as above. `kunit_end_suppress_warning()` accepts any
+        // value returned by `kunit_start_suppress_warning()`.
+        unsafe { bindings::kunit_end_suppress_warning(test, handle) };
+        assert_eq!(suppressed_count, 1);
+    }
+}

base-commit: fd73f4a6659897191fa0d40695fe370925dd3780
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH v1] rust: bug: add a KUnit test for warn_on!

[Miguel Ojeda]

On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 4:10 PM FUJITA Tomonori <tomo@flapping.org> wrote:
>
> From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@gmail.com>
>
> The test runs warn_on!(false) and warn_on!(true) inside a KUnit warning
> suppression block, then checks that one warning was counted. The counter
> is incremented by the kernel warning path, not by warn_on! itself, so a
> count of one means the warning was really reported.
>
> warn_flags! has a different definition per architecture. The test does not
> look at any of them, so it runs on every architecture that supports Rust.
>
> The new CONFIG_RUST_BUG_KUNIT_TEST depends on BUG. With CONFIG_BUG=n,
> warn_on! does nothing and no warning is counted.
>
> Signed-off-by: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@gmail.com>

Applied to `rust-next` -- thanks!

    [ Added newlines for clarity. - Miguel ]

Cheers,
Miguel