On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 4:49 AM Daniel Latypov wrote: > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 1:11 AM 'David Gow' via KUnit Development > wrote: > > > > The kunit_mark_skipped() macro marks the current test as "skipped", with > > the provided reason. The kunit_skip() macro will mark the test as > > skipped, and abort the test. > > > > The TAP specification supports this "SKIP directive" as a comment after > > the "ok" / "not ok" for a test. See the "Directives" section of the TAP > > spec for details: > > https://testanything.org/tap-specification.html#directives > > > > The 'success' field for KUnit tests is replaced with a kunit_status > > enum, which can be SUCCESS, FAILURE, or SKIPPED, combined with a > > 'status_comment' containing information on why a test was skipped. > > > > A new 'kunit_status' test suite is added to test this. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Gow > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Latypov > > This is pretty exciting to see. > Some minor nits below. > > Thanks: I'll take these suggestions on board for v2. > > --- > > This change depends on the assertion typechecking fix here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20210513193204.816681-1-davidgow@google.com/ > > Only the first two patches in the series are required. > > > > This is the long-awaited follow-up to the skip tests RFC: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20200513042956.109987-1-davidgow@google.com/ > > > > There are quite a few changes since that version, principally: > > - A kunit_status enum is now used, with SKIPPED a distinct state > > - The kunit_mark_skipped() and kunit_skip() macros now take printf-style > > format strings. > > - There is now a kunit_status test suite providing basic tests of this > > functionality. > > - The kunit_tool changes have been split into a separate commit. > > - The example skipped tests have been expanded an moved to their own > > suite, which is not enabled by KUNIT_ALL_TESTS. > > - A number of other fixes and changes here and there. > > > > Cheers, > > -- David > > > > include/kunit/test.h | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > lib/kunit/kunit-test.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > lib/kunit/test.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++------------- > > 3 files changed, 134 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/kunit/test.h b/include/kunit/test.h > > index b68c61348121..40b536da027e 100644 > > --- a/include/kunit/test.h > > +++ b/include/kunit/test.h > > @@ -105,6 +105,18 @@ struct kunit; > > #define KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT " " > > #define KUNIT_SUBSUBTEST_INDENT " " > > > > +/** > > + * enum kunit_status - Type of result for a test or test suite > > + * @KUNIT_SUCCESS: Denotes the test suite has not failed nor been skipped > > + * @KUNIT_FAILURE: Denotes the test has failed. > > + * @KUNIT_SKIPPED: Denotes the test has been skipped. > > + */ > > +enum kunit_status { > > + KUNIT_SUCCESS, > > + KUNIT_FAILURE, > > + KUNIT_SKIPPED, > > +}; > > + > > /** > > * struct kunit_case - represents an individual test case. > > * > > @@ -148,13 +160,20 @@ struct kunit_case { > > const void* (*generate_params)(const void *prev, char *desc); > > > > /* private: internal use only. */ > > - bool success; > > + enum kunit_status status; > > char *log; > > }; > > > > -static inline char *kunit_status_to_string(bool status) > > +static inline char *kunit_status_to_string(enum kunit_status status) > > nit: I personally would think this maps SKIPPED => "SKIPPED", etc. > (If I didn't know all that logic lived in kunit tool). > > I don't have any replacement names to suggest that I'm fully happy > with, however. > kunit_status_to_tap_str(), kunit_status_to_ok_notok(), eh. > Yeah: I kept the existing names for these functions, which which worked well when it was just a bool. The TAP spec seems to just call this "ok/not ok", and given we already have kunit_print_okay_not_ok(), kunit_status_to_ok_not_ok() seems the best of those options. > > { > > - return status ? "ok" : "not ok"; > > + switch (status) { > > + case KUNIT_SKIPPED: > > + case KUNIT_SUCCESS: > > + return "ok"; > > + case KUNIT_FAILURE: > > + return "not ok"; > > + } > > + return "invalid"; > > } > > > > /** > > @@ -212,6 +231,7 @@ struct kunit_suite { > > struct kunit_case *test_cases; > > > > /* private: internal use only */ > > + char status_comment[256]; > > struct dentry *debugfs; > > char *log; > > }; > > @@ -245,19 +265,21 @@ struct kunit { > > * be read after the test case finishes once all threads associated > > * with the test case have terminated. > > */ > > - bool success; /* Read only after test_case finishes! */ > > spinlock_t lock; /* Guards all mutable test state. */ > > + enum kunit_status status; /* Read only after test_case finishes! */ > > /* > > * Because resources is a list that may be updated multiple times (with > > * new resources) from any thread associated with a test case, we must > > * protect it with some type of lock. > > */ > > struct list_head resources; /* Protected by lock. */ > > + > > + char status_comment[256]; > > }; > > > > static inline void kunit_set_failure(struct kunit *test) > > { > > - WRITE_ONCE(test->success, false); > > + WRITE_ONCE(test->status, KUNIT_FAILURE); > > } > > > > void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log); > > @@ -348,7 +370,7 @@ static inline int kunit_run_all_tests(void) > > #define kunit_suite_for_each_test_case(suite, test_case) \ > > for (test_case = suite->test_cases; test_case->run_case; test_case++) > > > > -bool kunit_suite_has_succeeded(struct kunit_suite *suite); > > +enum kunit_status kunit_suite_has_succeeded(struct kunit_suite *suite); > > > > /* > > * Like kunit_alloc_resource() below, but returns the struct kunit_resource > > @@ -612,6 +634,40 @@ void kunit_cleanup(struct kunit *test); > > > > void kunit_log_append(char *log, const char *fmt, ...); > > > > +/** > > + * kunit_mark_skipped() - Marks @test_or_suite as skipped > > + * > > + * @test_or_suite: The test context object. > > + * @fmt: A printk() style format string. > > + * > > + * Marks the test as skipped. @fmt is given output as the test status > > + * comment, typically the reason the test was skipped. > > + * > > + * Test execution continues after kunit_mark_skipped() is called. > > + */ > > +#define kunit_mark_skipped(test_or_suite, fmt, ...) \ > > + do { \ > > + WRITE_ONCE((test_or_suite)->status, KUNIT_SKIPPED); \ > > + scnprintf((test_or_suite)->status_comment, 256, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ > > + } while (0) > > + > > +/** > > + * kunit_skip() - Marks @test_or_suite as skipped > > + * > > + * @test_or_suite: The test context object. > > + * @fmt: A printk() style format string. > > + * > > + * Skips the test. @fmt is given output as the test status > > + * comment, typically the reason the test was skipped. > > + * > > + * Test execution is halted after kunit_skip() is called. > > + */ > > +#define kunit_skip(test_or_suite, fmt, ...) \ > > + do { \ > > + kunit_mark_skipped((test_or_suite), fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);\ > > + kunit_try_catch_throw(&((test_or_suite)->try_catch)); \ > > + } while (0) > > + > > /* > > * printk and log to per-test or per-suite log buffer. Logging only done > > * if CONFIG_KUNIT_DEBUGFS is 'y'; if it is 'n', no log is allocated/used. > > diff --git a/lib/kunit/kunit-test.c b/lib/kunit/kunit-test.c > > index 69f902440a0e..d69efcbed624 100644 > > --- a/lib/kunit/kunit-test.c > > +++ b/lib/kunit/kunit-test.c > > @@ -437,7 +437,47 @@ static void kunit_log_test(struct kunit *test) > > #endif > > } > > > > +static void kunit_status_set_failure_test(struct kunit *test) > > +{ > > + struct kunit fake; > > + > > + kunit_init_test(&fake, "fake test", NULL); > > + > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake.status, (enum kunit_status)KUNIT_SUCCESS); > > + kunit_set_failure(&fake); > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake.status, (enum kunit_status)KUNIT_FAILURE); > > +} > > + > > +static void kunit_status_mark_skipped_test(struct kunit *test) > > +{ > > + struct kunit fake; > > + > > + kunit_init_test(&fake, "fake test", NULL); > > + > > + /* Before: Should be SUCCESS with no comment. */ > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake.status, KUNIT_SUCCESS); > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, fake.status_comment, ""); > > + > > + /* Mark the test as skipped. */ > > + kunit_mark_skipped(&fake, "Accepts format string: %s", "YES"); > > + > > + /* After: Should be SKIPPED with our comment. */ > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, fake.status, (enum kunit_status)KUNIT_SKIPPED); > > + KUNIT_EXPECT_STREQ(test, fake.status_comment, "Accepts format string: YES"); > > +} > > + > > +static struct kunit_case kunit_status_test_cases[] = { > > + KUNIT_CASE(kunit_status_set_failure_test), > > + KUNIT_CASE(kunit_status_mark_skipped_test), > > + {} > > +}; > > + > > +static struct kunit_suite kunit_status_test_suite = { > > + .name = "kunit_status", > > + .test_cases = kunit_status_test_cases, > > +}; > > + > > kunit_test_suites(&kunit_try_catch_test_suite, &kunit_resource_test_suite, > > - &kunit_log_test_suite); > > + &kunit_log_test_suite, &kunit_status_test_suite); > > > > MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2"); > > diff --git a/lib/kunit/test.c b/lib/kunit/test.c > > index 2f6cc0123232..0ee07705d2b0 100644 > > --- a/lib/kunit/test.c > > +++ b/lib/kunit/test.c > > @@ -98,12 +98,14 @@ static void kunit_print_subtest_start(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > > > static void kunit_print_ok_not_ok(void *test_or_suite, > > bool is_test, > > - bool is_ok, > > + enum kunit_status status, > > size_t test_number, > > - const char *description) > > + const char *description, > > + const char *directive) > > { > > struct kunit_suite *suite = is_test ? NULL : test_or_suite; > > struct kunit *test = is_test ? test_or_suite : NULL; > > + const char *directive_header = (status == KUNIT_SKIPPED) ? " # SKIP " : ""; > > > > /* > > * We do not log the test suite results as doing so would > > @@ -114,25 +116,31 @@ static void kunit_print_ok_not_ok(void *test_or_suite, > > * representation. > > */ > > if (suite) > > - pr_info("%s %zd - %s\n", > > - kunit_status_to_string(is_ok), > > - test_number, description); > > + pr_info("%s %zd - %s%s%s\n", > > + kunit_status_to_string(status), > > + test_number, description, > > + directive_header, directive ? directive : ""); > > else > > - kunit_log(KERN_INFO, test, KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "%s %zd - %s", > > Hmm, why not kunit_info(test, ...)? > No reason: it was kunit_log() originally, and I didn't change it. I can replace this for v2 if you prefer. > > - kunit_status_to_string(is_ok), > > - test_number, description); > > + kunit_log(KERN_INFO, test, > > + KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT "%s %zd - %s%s%s", > > + kunit_status_to_string(status), > > + test_number, description, > > + directive_header, directive ? directive : ""); > > } > > > > -bool kunit_suite_has_succeeded(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > +enum kunit_status kunit_suite_has_succeeded(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > { > > const struct kunit_case *test_case; > > + enum kunit_status status = KUNIT_SKIPPED; > > > > kunit_suite_for_each_test_case(suite, test_case) { > > - if (!test_case->success) > > - return false; > > + if (test_case->status == KUNIT_FAILURE) > > + return KUNIT_FAILURE; > > + else if (test_case->status == KUNIT_SUCCESS) > > + status = KUNIT_SUCCESS; > > } > > > > - return true; > > + return status; > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_suite_has_succeeded); > > > > @@ -143,7 +151,8 @@ static void kunit_print_subtest_end(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > kunit_print_ok_not_ok((void *)suite, false, > > kunit_suite_has_succeeded(suite), > > kunit_suite_counter++, > > - suite->name); > > + suite->name, > > + suite->status_comment); > > } > > > > unsigned int kunit_test_case_num(struct kunit_suite *suite, > > @@ -252,7 +261,8 @@ void kunit_init_test(struct kunit *test, const char *name, char *log) > > test->log = log; > > if (test->log) > > test->log[0] = '\0'; > > - test->success = true; > > + test->status = KUNIT_SUCCESS; > > + test->status_comment[0] = '\0'; > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_init_test); > > > > @@ -376,7 +386,8 @@ static void kunit_run_case_catch_errors(struct kunit_suite *suite, > > context.test_case = test_case; > > kunit_try_catch_run(try_catch, &context); > > > > - test_case->success = test->success; > > + test_case->status = test->status; > > + > > } > > > > int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > @@ -388,7 +399,6 @@ int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > > > kunit_suite_for_each_test_case(suite, test_case) { > > struct kunit test = { .param_value = NULL, .param_index = 0 }; > > - bool test_success = true; > > > > if (test_case->generate_params) { > > /* Get initial param. */ > > @@ -398,7 +408,6 @@ int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > > > do { > > kunit_run_case_catch_errors(suite, test_case, &test); > > - test_success &= test_case->success; > > > > if (test_case->generate_params) { > > if (param_desc[0] == '\0') { > > @@ -410,7 +419,7 @@ int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > KUNIT_SUBTEST_INDENT > > "# %s: %s %d - %s", > > test_case->name, > > - kunit_status_to_string(test.success), > > + kunit_status_to_string(test.status), > > test.param_index + 1, param_desc); > > > > /* Get next param. */ > > @@ -420,9 +429,10 @@ int kunit_run_tests(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > } > > } while (test.param_value); > > > > - kunit_print_ok_not_ok(&test, true, test_success, > > + kunit_print_ok_not_ok(&test, true, test_case->status, > > kunit_test_case_num(suite, test_case), > > - test_case->name); > > + test_case->name, > > + test.status_comment); > > } > > > > kunit_print_subtest_end(suite); > > @@ -434,6 +444,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kunit_run_tests); > > static void kunit_init_suite(struct kunit_suite *suite) > > { > > kunit_debugfs_create_suite(suite); > > + suite->status_comment[0] = '\0'; > > } > > > > int __kunit_test_suites_init(struct kunit_suite * const * const suites) > > -- > > 2.31.1.818.g46aad6cb9e-goog > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "KUnit Development" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kunit-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kunit-dev/20210526081112.3652290-1-davidgow%40google.com.