From: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
To: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
Cc: Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] drivers: kunit: Generic helpers for test device creation
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2023 17:52:01 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABVgOSmx3A4Vwos2_8xO-XQrQAw5gvY0nc5zLpLmcJ7FtA-dTQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <97f60824-7067-62cc-2882-d998072886ce@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3746 bytes --]
On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 at 14:51, Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/24/23 08:34, David Gow wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 at 14:11, Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3/23/23 18:36, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 03:02:03PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> >>>> On 3/23/23 14:29, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 02:16:52PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
>
> >> Ok. Fair enough. Besides, if the root-device was sufficient - then I
> >> would actually not see the need for a helper. People could in that case
> >> directly use the root_device_register(). So, if helpers are provided
> >> they should be backed up by a device with a bus then.
> >
> > I think there is _some_ value in helpers even without a bus, but it's
> > much more limited:
> > - It's less confusing if KUnit test devices are using kunit labelled
> > structs and functions.
> > - Helpers could use KUnit's resource management API to ensure any
> > device created is properly unregistered and removed when the test
> > exits (particularly if it exits early due to, e.g., an assertion).
>
> Ah. That's true. Being able to abort the test on error w/o being forced
> to do a clean-up dance for the dummy device would be convenient.
>
> > I've played around implementing those with a proper struct
> > kunit_device and the automatic cleanup on test failure, and thus far
> > it -- like root_device_register -- works for all of the tests except
> > the drm-test-managed one.
> >
> > So if we really wanted to, we could use KUnit-specific helpers for
> > just those tests which currently work with root_device_register(), but
> > if we're going to try to implement a KUnit bus -- which I think is at
> > least worth investigating -- I'd rather not either hold up otherwise
> > good tests on helper development, or rush a helper out only to have to
> > change it a lot when we see exactly what the bus implementation would
> > look like.
>
> It's easy for me to agree.
>
> >> As I said, in my very specific IIO related test the test device does not
> >> need a bus. Hence I'll drop the 'generic helpers' from this series.
> >>
> >
> > I think that sounds like a good strategy for now, and we can work on a
> > set of 'generic helpers' which have an associated bus and struct
> > kunit_device in the meantime. If we can continue to use
> > root_device_register until those are ready, that'd be very convenient.
>
> Would it be a tiny bit more acceptable if we did add a very simple:
>
> #define kunit_root_device_register(name) root_device_register(name)
> #define kunit_root_device_unregister(dev) root_device_unregister(dev)
>
> to include/kunit/device.h (or somesuch)
>
> This should help us later to at least spot the places where
> root_device_[un]register() is abused and (potentially mass-)covert them
> to use the proper helpers when they're available.
>
Great idea.
The code I've been playing with has the following in include/kunit/device.h:
/* Register a new device against a KUnit test. */
struct device *kunit_device_register(struct kunit *test, const char *name);
/* Unregister a device created by kunit_device_register() early (i.e.,
before test cleanup). */
void kunit_device_unregister(struct kunit *test, struct device *dev);
If we used the same names, and just forwarded them to
root_device_register() and root_device_unregister() for now
(discarding the struct kunit pointer), then I expect we could just
swap out the implementation to gain the extra functionality.
It's a little less explicit, though, so I could see the value in using
macros with "root_device" in the name to make the current
implementation clearer, and the eventual change more obvious.
Cheers,
-- David
[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4003 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-24 9:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-22 9:05 [PATCH v5 0/8] Support ROHM BU27034 ALS sensor Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 9:05 ` [PATCH v5 1/8] drivers: kunit: Generic helpers for test device creation Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 12:04 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-22 12:07 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-22 13:48 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 18:57 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-23 7:17 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2023-03-23 8:58 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-23 9:20 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-23 10:25 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-23 10:43 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-23 10:01 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-23 10:27 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-23 11:00 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-23 10:12 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-23 10:21 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-23 12:16 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-23 12:29 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-23 13:02 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-23 16:36 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-24 6:11 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-24 6:34 ` David Gow
2023-03-24 6:51 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-24 9:52 ` David Gow [this message]
2023-03-24 10:05 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-24 10:17 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-25 4:35 ` David Gow
2023-03-25 7:26 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-24 12:46 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-24 12:31 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-25 5:40 ` David Gow
2023-03-29 19:43 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-25 17:50 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-26 17:16 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2023-04-01 15:30 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-29 19:46 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-04-01 15:36 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-24 12:36 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-24 12:43 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-24 13:02 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-24 13:42 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-22 12:08 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-23 7:30 ` David Gow
2023-03-23 8:35 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-23 9:02 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-03-23 10:07 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-22 9:06 ` [PATCH v5 2/8] drm/tests: helpers: Use generic helpers Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 9:06 ` [PATCH v5 3/8] dt-bindings: iio: light: Support ROHM BU27034 Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 9:06 ` [PATCH v5 4/8] iio: light: Add gain-time-scale helpers Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 9:07 ` [PATCH v5 5/8] iio: test: test " Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-24 6:29 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 9:07 ` [PATCH v5 6/8] MAINTAINERS: Add IIO " Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 9:07 ` [PATCH v5 7/8] iio: light: ROHM BU27034 Ambient Light Sensor Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-26 16:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-27 7:16 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2023-03-22 9:08 ` [PATCH v5 8/8] MAINTAINERS: Add ROHM BU27034 Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 10:01 ` [PATCH v5 0/8] Support ROHM BU27034 ALS sensor Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-22 10:34 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2023-03-22 10:59 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-22 11:02 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-23 9:28 ` Maxime Ripard
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=CABVgOSmx3A4Vwos2_8xO-XQrQAw5gvY0nc5zLpLmcJ7FtA-dTQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=brendan.higgins@linux.dev \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com \
--cc=maxime@cerno.tech \
--cc=mazziesaccount@gmail.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
/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).