From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>,
shuah@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/list-test: add a test for the 'list' doubly linked list
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 11:15:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201910081110.C2C582408F@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191008174837.GA155928@google.com>
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:48:37AM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 02:36:33PM -0700, David Gow wrote:
> > This change adds a KUnit test for the kernel doubly linked list
> > implementation in include/linux/list.h
> >
> > Note that, at present, it only tests the list_ types (not the
> > singly-linked hlist_), and does not yet test all of the
> > list_for_each_entry* macros (and some related things like
> > list_prepare_entry).
> >
> > This change depends on KUnit, so should be merged via the 'test' branch:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest.git/log/?h=test
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
> > ---
> > lib/Kconfig.debug | 12 +
> > lib/Makefile | 3 +
> > lib/list-test.c | 711 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 726 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 lib/list-test.c
>
> Also, I think it might be good to make a MAINTAINERs entry for this
> test.
Another thought, though maybe this is already covered and I missed the
"best practices" notes on naming conventions.
As the "one-off" tests are already named "foo_test.c" it seems like
KUnit tests should be named distinctly. Should this be lib/kunit-list.c,
lib/list-kunit.c, or something else?
For internal naming of structs and tests, should things be
named "kunit_foo"? Examples here would be kunit_list_struct and
kunit_list_test_...
When testing other stuff, should only exposed interfaces be tested?
Many things have their API exposed via registration of a static structure
of function pointers to static functions. What's the proposed best way
to get at that? Should the KUnit tests is IN the .c file that declares
all the static functions?
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-08 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-07 21:36 [PATCH] lib/list-test: add a test for the 'list' doubly linked list David Gow
2019-10-07 21:58 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-10-08 1:03 ` Kees Cook
2019-10-08 23:30 ` David Gow
2019-10-08 3:29 ` Kees Cook
2019-10-08 17:48 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-10-08 18:15 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2019-10-08 22:59 ` Brendan Higgins
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=201910081110.C2C582408F@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brendanhiggins@google.com \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/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