From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15903C32750 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 17:02:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD37A20840 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 17:02:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="K8XRlY7J" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727923AbfHMRCb (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Aug 2019 13:02:31 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f193.google.com ([209.85.210.193]:36274 "EHLO mail-pf1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726810AbfHMRCb (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Aug 2019 13:02:31 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f193.google.com with SMTP id w2so1130315pfi.3 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 10:02:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BG31IdTtyicCDPh3vXx1nhiittmwUB0Yq2rcUYCbYUo=; b=K8XRlY7JDJXLNNvGqHfdVZJQ9a5VNjCkjwZANDUW9TuuB1ZEzYERq3mQwjA8BJ9Y4s 6XJQTwJpGEgBRyf8UaDjL5hrQiCF2jXaT3Pvmh8bbF9bFBcB6C+4UHT8SpOLWJSHDzrD mlDFiQwDwmY3oYYVCIbumbAWcbokEXIT+zEgaWsug4nYa6isFt3sH8TYHWYCPi0m9IPA XElwL6x+27qM3o+3I+oxteDi0nbA4Uo/Uk+dz7ss+8bCoHNYg6vG++6KRWD0JEefIpaL qfYFRveEQPkczl1IiwPGtk6E4NYNbK4FWlm87eXuk8Ui9uwOfgH1pdPq3nnModSdZ2NK Ex/w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=BG31IdTtyicCDPh3vXx1nhiittmwUB0Yq2rcUYCbYUo=; b=RLGc55vuAzHxBiZ8q4OgIoi1oGeGRUScL3QKekUzRcpgCIIpjJ/6wPdkBRCQAThsWp HL4mZs2A/i0Wb/1+5XynAE4xu6NC3vho6zyCZM4VWPUYNjZIeQ8loGTNxnljnPJRTqAZ U35fOF2WTPkG+WvsbX4Wqj8xooybNyXGPcLpfrWja5R7Wrf9uC14NxMbO5OQnm9ykSlj juTkSlfGZv6Gj+I73AqemCO2/nq86CJ8DH4jnNPMFIiItG5bOeVF69wRznC4ysddxXTm WixADFWszSu9NI0XPKy5z8IEl+wz32fqhRy7s8UWrnWne2hXjNEQ2AdrBePPe9Jzf4fU ts5A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVIAMBM5K1qKgtFodBtnPqAcrRG0jQEyzsdSSAJArAqfPWHVNyl vC2Gn4tVoUce6O7bwy0NyyA0rT247/AGmyUOMWjujQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwySabXHotNvQRy/UUN/EhAL08CmISGwSZKsEXDa2DGE+8KsL0EhT8WGXmfoKi4f5IrGA753TLXzw9BhWqTRdA= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8f2e:: with SMTP id y14mr12687349pfr.113.1565715749878; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 10:02:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190813082336.GB17627@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: From: Brendan Higgins Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 10:02:18 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC 00/19] Integration of Kernel Test Framework (KTF) into the kernel tree To: Knut Omang Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , linux-kbuild , Shuah Khan , Jonathan Corbet , Masahiro Yamada , Michal Marek , Shreyans Devendra Doshi <0xinfosect0r@gmail.com>, Alan Maguire , Kevin Hilman , Hidenori Yamaji , Frank Rowand , Timothy Bird , Luis Chamberlain , "Theodore Ts'o" , Daniel Vetter , Stephen Boyd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 2:51 AM Knut Omang wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 10:23 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 08:09:15AM +0200, Knut Omang wrote: > > > and in the making:: > > > > > > kunit/ (kernel only (UML)) > > > > You are going to have to integrate this with kunit, to come up with a > > superset of both in the end. > > Yes, I agree - getting to a unified approach has been my intention since I first brought this > up at LPC'17. > > > And I do not think that kunit is only UML, it's just that seems to be > > what Brendan tests with, but should work with other arches as well. > > If I get Brendan right, it is UML only now but can be extended to also support > kernels running on real hardware. Still it is kernel only, while KTF also has the > hybrid mode, where a test can have code and assertions both in user mode and kernel mode. > This is made easier and more streamlined by letting all reporting happen from user mode. Nope, the KUnit patchset currently under review *does* support any architecture; we have tested it on x86, ARM, and UML, but it should work on any architecture. I added support for that a while ago due to popular demand.