Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] mctp: test: disallow MCTP_TEST when building as a module

[Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>]

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 1:27 PM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 9:38 PM David Gow <davidgow@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 10:10 AM Jeremy Kerr <jk@codeconstruct.com.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > > In any case, thanks a lot -- this is awesome.
> > >
> > > Oh neat, glad it's useful!
>
> +1
>
> > >
> > > I'm happy to keep hacking on this if it's in a direction that makes
> > > sense for kunit in general. As an approximate plan, I can fix the UML
> > > breakages, then work on some resulting simplifications for tree-wide
> > > initialisers (we'd no longer need the null-terminated arrays of suites
> > > everywhere, for example).
>
> Getting rid of the arrays of arrays of suites sounds great to me.
>
> I could also pick that bit up, since I'm the person who most recently
> added code that depends on it:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest.git/commit/?h=kunit&id=3b29021ddd10cfb6b2565c623595bd3b02036f33

I made the executor internally flatten the array-of-arrays into just
an array to flush out the changes we'd need to make.
I've sent that here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20211013191320.2490913-1-dlatypov@google.com

After doing it and seeing the diffstat (2 files changed, 85
insertions(+), 178 deletions(-)), I'm actually tempted to have that go
in as an actual patch.

When we rework the kunit_test_suites section, we could then just drop
the flattening helper function.

>
> > >
> > +dlatypov, +kunit-dev
> >
> > Yeah, we think this would be a much better direction for KUnit to go
> > for modules. If you're happy to work on it, that'd be great! Brendan,
> > Daniel (CCed), and I would be more than willing to help out with
> > questions, reviews, etc, as well.
> >
> > On the other hand, if you're really busy and you'd rather we pick this
> > up, improved module support has been on the to-do list for ages, so we
> > could bump it up the list a bit and finish it off.
> >
> > The UML breakages were mostly pretty simple: our default config
> > doesn't require module support at all, so the various functions should
> > just need to go behind the appropriate #ifdefs. A quick way to test it
> > is just to run './tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py run' from the kernel
> > source directory, which will configure, build, and run everything in
> > the .kunit builddir.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -- David