Re: [PATCH 00/11] Introduce Simple atomic and non-atomic counters

[Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>]

On 9/28/20 5:13 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 04:41:47PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 9/26/20 10:29 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:14PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>>>      7. Verified that the test module compiles in kunit env. and test
>>>>         module can be loaded to run the test.
>>>
>>> I meant write it using KUnit interfaces (e.g. KUNIT_EXPECT*(),
>>> kunit_test_suite(), etc):
>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kunit/
>>>
>>> Though I see the docs are still not updated[1] to reflect the Kconfig
>>> (CONFIG_foo_KUNIT_TEST) and file naming conventions (foo_kunit.c).
>>>
>>
>> I would like to be able to run this test outside Kunit env., hence the
>> choice to go with a module and kselftest script. It makes it easier to
>> test as part of my workflow as opposed to doing a kunit and build and
>> running it that way.
> 
> It does -- you just load it normally like before and it prints out
> everything just fine. This is how I use the lib/test_user_copy.c and
> lib/test_overflow.c before/after their conversions.
> 

I am not seeing any kunit links to either of these tests. I find the
lib/test_overflow.c very hard to read.

I am going to stick with what I have for now and handle conversion
later.

I think it might be a good idea to add tests for atomic_t and refcount_t
APIS as well at some point.

thanks,
-- Shuah