From: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Cc: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>,
Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, shuah <shuah@kernel.org>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
linux-um@lists.infradead.org,
Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com>,
"Bird, Timothy" <Tim.Bird@sony.com>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
wfg@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/18] kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 01:09:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFd5g44V3ZLNazUOgOo2sFR3zzbNnTkH4e9uxGX4iHi7G73Mzw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190627181636.5EA752064A@mail.kernel.org>
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:16 AM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-06-26 16:00:40)
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 8:41 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > scenario like below, but where it is a problem. There could be three
> > > CPUs, or even one CPU and three threads if you want to describe the
> > > extra thread scenario.
> > >
> > > Here's my scenario where it isn't needed:
> > >
> > > CPU0 CPU1
> > > ---- ----
> > > kunit_run_test(&test)
> > > test_case_func()
> > > ....
> > > [mock hardirq]
> > > kunit_set_success(&test)
> > > [hardirq ends]
> > > ...
> > > complete(&test_done)
> > > wait_for_completion(&test_done)
> > > kunit_get_success(&test)
> > >
> > > We don't need to care about having locking here because success or
> > > failure only happens in one place and it's synchronized with the
> > > completion.
> >
> > Here is the scenario I am concerned about:
> >
> > CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
> > ---- ---- ----
> > kunit_run_test(&test)
> > test_case_func()
> > ....
> > schedule_work(foo_func)
> > [mock hardirq] foo_func()
> > ... ...
> > kunit_set_success(false) kunit_set_success(false)
> > [hardirq ends] ...
> > ...
> > complete(&test_done)
> > wait_for_completion(...)
> > kunit_get_success(&test)
> >
> > In my scenario, since both CPU1 and CPU2 update the success status of
> > the test simultaneously, even though they are setting it to the same
> > value. If my understanding is correct, this could result in a
> > write-tear on some architectures in some circumstances. I suppose we
> > could just make it an atomic boolean, but I figured locking is also
> > fine, and generally preferred.
>
> This is what we have WRITE_ONCE() and READ_ONCE() for. Maybe you could
> just use that in the getter and setters and remove the lock if it isn't
> used for anything else.
>
> It may also be a good idea to have a kunit_fail_test() API that fails
> the test passed in with a WRITE_ONCE(false). Otherwise, the test is
> assumed successful and it isn't even possible for a test to change the
> state from failure to success due to a logical error because the API
> isn't available. Then we don't really need to have a generic
> kunit_set_success() function at all. We could have a kunit_test_failed()
> function too that replaces the kunit_get_success() function. That would
> read better in an if condition.
You know what, I think you are right.
Sorry, for not realizing this earlier, I think you mentioned something
along these lines a long time ago.
Thanks for your patience!
> >
> > Also, to be clear, I am onboard with dropping then IRQ stuff for now.
> > I am fine moving to a mutex for the time being.
> >
>
> Ok.
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-28 8:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-17 8:25 [PATCH v5 00/18] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:25 ` [PATCH v5 01/18] kunit: test: add KUnit test runner core Brendan Higgins
2019-06-20 0:15 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-06-25 20:28 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-25 21:44 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-25 22:14 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-25 23:02 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-26 6:41 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-26 22:02 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-27 0:05 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-26 3:40 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-06-26 23:00 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-27 18:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-06-28 8:09 ` Brendan Higgins [this message]
2019-06-25 22:33 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-26 0:07 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-26 3:36 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-26 22:16 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:25 ` [PATCH v5 02/18] kunit: test: add test resource management API Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:25 ` [PATCH v5 03/18] kunit: test: add string_stream a std::stream like string builder Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:25 ` [PATCH v5 04/18] kunit: test: add kunit_stream a std::stream like logger Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 05/18] kunit: test: add the concept of expectations Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 06/18] kbuild: enable building KUnit Brendan Higgins
2019-06-25 22:13 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-25 22:41 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-25 23:03 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 07/18] kunit: test: add initial tests Brendan Higgins
2019-06-25 23:22 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-26 7:53 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-07-02 17:52 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-07-02 20:57 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 08/18] objtool: add kunit_try_catch_throw to the noreturn list Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 09/18] kunit: test: add support for test abort Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 10/18] kunit: test: add tests for kunit " Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 11/18] kunit: test: add the concept of assertions Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 12/18] kunit: test: add tests for KUnit managed resources Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 13/18] kunit: tool: add Python wrappers for running KUnit tests Brendan Higgins
2019-06-26 0:01 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-26 8:02 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-26 22:03 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-27 0:23 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 14/18] kunit: defconfig: add defconfigs for building " Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 15/18] Documentation: kunit: add documentation for KUnit Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 16/18] MAINTAINERS: add entry for KUnit the unit testing framework Brendan Higgins
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 17/18] kernel/sysctl-test: Add null pointer test for sysctl.c:proc_dointvec() Brendan Higgins
2019-06-26 2:17 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-27 4:07 ` Iurii Zaikin
2019-06-27 6:10 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-28 8:01 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-28 21:37 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-17 8:26 ` [PATCH v5 18/18] MAINTAINERS: add proc sysctl KUnit test to PROC SYSCTL section Brendan Higgins
2019-06-26 2:19 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-06-20 1:17 ` [PATCH v5 00/18] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework Frank Rowand
2019-06-21 14:59 ` shuah
2019-06-21 18:13 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-06-21 19:20 ` shuah
2019-06-22 0:54 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-07-03 23:40 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-21 23:35 ` Brendan Higgins
2019-06-26 2:38 ` Luis Chamberlain
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=CAFd5g44V3ZLNazUOgOo2sFR3zzbNnTkH4e9uxGX4iHi7G73Mzw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=brendanhiggins@google.com \
--cc=Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com \
--cc=Tim.Bird@sony.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=joel@jms.id.au \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=keescook@google.com \
--cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
--cc=kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=knut.omang@oracle.com \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-um@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=logang@deltatee.com \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=wfg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).