Re: [RFC v4 00/17] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework

Frank Rowand
2019-02-20T06:46:25Z

On 2/19/19 10:34 PM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 12:02 PM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
>> I have not read through the patches in any detail. I have read some of
>> the code to try to understand the patches to the devicetree unit tests.
>> So that may limit how valid my comments below are.
>
> No problem.
>
>>
>> I found the code difficult to read in places where it should have been
>> much simpler to read. Structuring the code in a pseudo object oriented
>> style meant that everywhere in a code path that I encountered a dynamic
>> function call, I had to go find where that dynamic function call was
>> initialized (and being the cautious person that I am, verify that
>> no where else was the value of that dynamic function call). With
>> primitive vi and tags, that search would have instead just been a
>> simple key press (or at worst a few keys) if hard coded function
>> calls were done instead of dynamic function calls. In the code paths
>> that I looked at, I did not see any case of a dynamic function being
>> anything other than the value it was originally initialized as.
>> There may be such cases, I did not read the entire patch set. There
>> may also be cases envisioned in the architects mind of how this
>> flexibility may be of future value. Dunno.
>
> Yeah, a lot of it is intended to make architecture specific
> implementations and some other future work easier. Some of it is also
> for testing purposes. Admittedly some is for neither reason, but given
> the heavy usage elsewhere, I figured there was no harm since it was
> all private internal usage anyway.
>

Increasing the cost for me (and all the other potential code readers)
to read the code is harm.