From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72C411FAB for ; Sat, 7 Oct 2023 00:30:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="QQybc0O0" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 94D48C433C8; Sat, 7 Oct 2023 00:30:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1696638631; bh=qku4TIqBIeR0rMEANa6BdOWeqlBDvb7TPU0kzcdjERE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=QQybc0O0C4H0SdKmbLe7VzodlG9ynlOhKBdsUkqq8TiWHz3Tg/f0Up8HUIMp2HKfS 97sGCF+uTHa+77XTLZSV/2Y8UKAmcHf78mG/UrfIyTfecWHcVVOPpeE+iok62Jx+N2 6w+x+VHn4zFG/ty0jp/myIBm+HNCguc/DbBdArr9N+HqXXraMTOjAbDGGWh9IJUYlY DT2rQO7zo2R/4rpI4HaxLNIV/w5RqWNHRabb1tdBCCaPeE1+Foq0Asmcc9IzOX2I1k TFUNOgFT9k/WSBs27tuvEz70ZysoSBhQdyfOxDd27QBPfUts/6IDP6BjgQpSeeVWV9 USX+gqddfhsPA== Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 17:30:30 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Willem de Bruijn Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, alexander.duyck@gmail.com, fw@strlen.de, Willem de Bruijn Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] add skb_segment kunit coverage Message-ID: <20231006173030.4908a356@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20231005134917.2244971-1-willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com> References: <20231005134917.2244971-1-willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 09:48:54 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote: > As discussed at netconf last week. Some kernel code is exercised in > many different ways. skb_segment is a prime example. This ~350 line > function has 49 different patches in git blame with 28 different > authors. > > When making a change, e.g., to fix a bug in one specific use case, > it is hard to establish through analysis alone that the change does > not break the many other paths through the code. It is impractical to > exercise all code paths through regression testing from userspace. > > Add the minimal infrastructure needed to add KUnit tests to networking, > and add code coverage for this function. Apparently we're supposed add descriptions to all modules now: WARNING: modpost: missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() in net/core/gso_test.o